Are they savings?

Pixelat0r

No, we definitely transfered credits. I think it's covered at: (Sorry, wont let me link).

"Steve Webb said:

Many grandparents are working hard all year round looking after their grandchildren, and it is important that they do not damage their own state pension rights as a result. Such grandparents are contributing to society just as much as someone in a paid job and should therefore be entitled to the same protection for their state pension as if they were in work.

The new system of transferable National Insurance credits means that grandparents need no longer lose out on building up a full state pension just because they are caring for a grandchild.

Working parents can give up the Child Benefit credits they receive and donate them to their child’s grandparents or other adult family members for the previous tax year. Grandparents and parents must apply for the credits to be transferred."

However it was 30 years when we did this so we may now not qulify again. Talk about chasing your tail

TELLIT01

Pixelat0r wrote: »

I have £2000 in my current account (presently) and had about £2700 at the time of the original claim but this again isn't pure savings as it's money we pay in for the mortgage direct debit, credit cards, car loan etc. The ISAs plus savings came to about ££17,300 at the time of the original claim and around £16,500 just before I surrendered the ISAs earlier this week.

Frustratingly it was CAB and the building society who suggested I try to recover some of the shortfall by tying it up for a while to earn some interest. I tried, like millions did, to get some compensation for significant shortfall and the bad advice the lead to my predicament but because I used a financial advisor who has since retired I didn't get a penny.

Using the term 'savings', which I have to admit I did, is causing confusion. The official term is 'capital' which can include more than money. In your case though we are just referring to money.
Unfortunately the poor advice (as it turns out to be in terms of access to benefits) was not provided by DWP or any other government department so is unlikely to be of any help if you appeal against the deprivation decision. There may be a glimmer of hope if either CAB or your building society actually put that advice in writing.
As you had only £500 over the upper limit for capital when you closed the ISAs and paid off part of the mortgage it should only be a matter of a few weeks maximum before you would have a legitimate claim to Income Related ESA. Call ESA and ask them how much the deprivation figure will reduce by week on week. The Decision Maker who made the original decision should be able to tell you that.

GirlFromMars_2

pmlindyloo wrote: »

Does anyone know how the diminishing capital rules work ?

Have tried to find a link but can't make head nor tail of it!

When would the OP be able to change his claim from contribution based to income based ESA with an inclusion for his wife?

It shouldn't be long right?

The OP syas they were only ever £1300 over the upper savings limit. And ironically when they paid the building society & supposedly deprived themselves of capital they were only £500 over the upper savings limit? There are an awful lot of things they could have spent £500 on that wouldn't have been classed as DoC, including just paying regular outgoings for a month.

If the DWP can't give a date soon for when the notional capital falls below the upper savings limit, then this is a case for the local MP who should be able to get answers.

Pixelat0r

I have followed your advice emailed my local MP for advice and to raise the issue with him. It's not impossible I'll find work relatively quickly but that's not guaranteed so it's a worry.

With the right advice I could have simply let the current account balance dwindle and kept the ISA's going and slowly crept under the £16,000 limit based on what I now know but nobody I contacted mention this option (probably as it's technically a little....well....dubious for them to advise this???).

Anyway, the official appeal is in so I have my fingers crossed. It was only verbally on the phone that they warned me of the outcome so I'll have to wait and see. If they'd mentioned the deprivation of capital issue I'd have sort out more advice before acting, they just stated I have over £16,000 in savings so didn't qualify, and they themselves used the term "savings" rather than capital. This prompted me to use the "savings" for their intended goal, to pay my mortgage.

I should have stayed on the dole and got a council house!!

GlasweJen

As your daughters are only working part time in fairly low paid jobs I'd be making sure that they're not depriving themselves of a pension by sacrificing their child benefit NI to their mum.

I've never heard of the loophole you're quoting before but I imagine it was aimed at higher earners in full time jobs who were making a NI contributions through earnings.

Pixelat0r

GlasweJen wrote: »

As your daughters are only working part time in fairly low paid jobs I'd be making sure that they're not depriving themselves of a pension by sacrificing their child benefit NI to their mum.

I've never heard of the loophole you're quoting before but I imagine it was aimed at higher earners in full time jobs who were making a NI contributions through earnings.

No, it's not a loophole, that's a quote directly off the gov.uk website entitled National Insurance: credits for parents and carers (CF411A) and it's for anyone caring for a related child regardless of income.

My wife had 29 years so we transferred 12 months only. They'll have plenty of time to catch up

TELLIT01

I really do hope you get things sorted quickly. Sadly, another instance of somebody trying to do everything the right way and losing out because of it.
When I was working for DWP I lost count of the number of people I spoke to who said something along the lines of "I've worked all my life and can get nothing. I should have sat on my **** doing drugs and booze. The government would have paid all my bills then".
At that time I couldn't possibly comment. Now I'm no longer working there I can say - "I couldn't possibly disagree!"

Pixelat0r

TELLIT01 wrote: »

I really do hope you get things sorted quickly. Sadly, another instance of somebody trying to do everything the right way and losing out because of it.
When I was working for DWP I lost count of the number of people I spoke to who said something along the lines of "I've worked all my life and can get nothing. I should have sat on my **** doing drugs and booze. The government would have paid all my bills then".
At that time I couldn't possibly comment. Now I'm no longer working there I can say - "I couldn't possibly disagree!"

Thanks, and you're right. I'm all in favour of supporting those who can't work for a valid reason. I could have been on incapacity most of my working life but chose to work. Meanwhile I live opposite an in-law who has never worked, who brags he fooled the incapacity tests, who has a blue badge but never bothered learning to drive, whose partner gets carers allowance yet does literally zero for him as he needs literally zero doing. He's up and down ladders at Christmas putting lights on his house, he's out fishing every chance he gets, he wanders round the town centre for hours on end unaided yet has a brand new council house with full central heating, a leather sofa and a minimum of one foreign holiday every year. Not to mention the regular takeaways, partly funded by the bootleg business run from the garden shed.

Makes you ever so slightly sick

FBaby

I really do hope you get things sorted quickly. Sadly, another instance of somebody trying to do everything the right way and losing out because of it.
When I was working for DWP I lost count of the number of people I spoke to who said something along the lines of "I've worked all my life and can get nothing. I should have sat on my **** doing drugs and booze. The government would have paid all my bills then".
At that time I couldn't possibly comment. Now I'm no longer working there I can say - "I couldn't possibly disagree!"

Hence more and more people doing exactly that -with or without the drug/booze and more and more people claiming benefits.

seven-day-weekend

Whilst I can see that limited resources have to go to the most 'needy', I do feel for the OP and would like to redefine needy......