We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Benefit fraud
Comments
-
PersianCatLady wrote: »I ask because one of my friends was on ESA and went back to work full time. The Job centre told her she was allowed to do permitted work.
As your friend never asked for permission to do that work it was never "permitted work" also I expect that your friend's full-time pay was significantly more than the limit for "permitted work".
However your friend's excuse does sound like a very cunning excuse for the benefit fraud that they committed.
No, the person got the job centre's permission to do the work. It was permitted work. I think what happened in my friend's case is that initially the money didn't reach whatever limit there was for earned income, but over time the hourly rate and hours got better. I think what happened is the job centre probably did explain to her that she had to earn less than £115 a week to keep her ESA. She didn't have an hourly limit because she was in the support group. Apparently they have an earnings limit but no hourly limit?
Sometimes I think all the explaining in the world isn't going to get the message across. The way she tells it, Christmas came, they wanted her to work more hours, she felt she was coping and she needed the money..... Fraud is fraud, ignorance of the law is no excuse, etc etc, but I can kind of understand why she just declared her earnings each month and thought the DWP would fix the ESA part. But as I said to her, it's not enough to do that - you also have to check that the benefits authority has done their calculations right.
I didn't like her job. It was commission based, so she only got paid depending on how much she brought in. No PAYE, no HMRC, so she had to self declare her earnings. These kinds of jobs should be outlawed, imho, and the companies should have to at least guarantee the NMW for the hours the person is on the job trying to sell whatever product or service the company is peddling.0 -
i have no qualms about the genuine people in our society that need help with various benefits.But why dont they put lists up in the townhall of the people who are on these benefits so they are open for anyone to see to see.
I think you would see a lot of the genuine fraudsters dont want to see their names highlighted in the town hall, i see them walking around my town on pip the higher rate & they are walking perfectly ok, because they think that people dont know about it , im pretty sure i wouldnt want my name up on the town hall wall unless i was really genuine.
How do you know the people who are walking are on the higher rate for PiP? As for walking okay, who knows how much pain or discomfort they are in? Or how often they have to pause to catch their breath? Or even how many days it took them to be well enough to venture out?0 -
No, the person got the job centre's permission to do the work. It was permitted work
I don't wish to keep arguing with you but your friend is wrong.
She didn't have an hourly limit because she was in the support group
Nonsense, "permitted work" is up to a maximum of 15 hours per week unless you are doing "supported permitted work" when there is no hours limit and only the earnings limit applies.
Supported permitted work criteria is work that is supervised by someone who is employed by a public or local council or a voluntary organisation, and whose job it is to arrange work for disabled people
So unless your friend did this very specific and narrowly defined type of "supported permitted work" she did have a weekly limit of 15 hours and £115.50.
The fact that she went back to work full-time for a job that did not meet the "supported permitted work" criteria meant that it was never "permitted work".
I think all the explaining in the world isn't going to get the message across
It doesn't matter how many times you explain it because what she has told you is wrong.
The way she tells it
Is still wrong.0 -
PersianCatLady wrote: »No, the person got the job centre's permission to do the work. It was permitted work
I don't wish to keep arguing with you but your friend is wrong.
She didn't have an hourly limit because she was in the support group
Nonsense, "permitted work" is up to a maximum of 15 hours per week unless you are doing "supported permitted work" when there is no hours limit and only the earnings limit applies.
Supported permitted work criteria is work that is supervised by someone who is employed by a public or local council or a voluntary organisation, and whose job it is to arrange work for disabled people
So unless your friend did this very specific and narrowly defined type of "supported permitted work" she did have a weekly limit of 15 hours and £115.50.
The fact that she went back to work full-time for a job that did not meet the "supported permitted work" criteria meant that it was never "permitted work".
I think all the explaining in the world isn't going to get the message across
It doesn't matter how many times you explain it because what she has told you is wrong.
The way she tells it
Is still wrong.
She was offered some work. She decided she wanted to do it and got the job centre's permission. As I understand it, as long as they approve the work it is permitted work.
She wasn't doing supported permitted work - what I said was she was in the support group for ESA, not the WRAG. The way she understood it, because she was in the support group, she said the job centre told her she could earn up to x amount of pounds and work whatever hours she needed to. Hence her declaring her earnings but not her hours. I think though there would still have been a restriction on the number of hours.
She's being asked to repay some of the ESA because her earnings were too much in some of the weeks she worked. Fair enough. But at the same time, if she declared her earnings, why didn't the DWP reduce her ESA accordingly at the time?
To me, if someone is well enough to work more than two days a week, then why should they get ESA? At least for the weeks where they can work more than 16 hours a week, even if that isn't every week.
My point was people get all these benefits, but they are not on top of things like how to transition out of them. And there's a cash flow problem. She didn't receive her first pay from her work until six weeks later. It's the nature of commission work. The payment plans are quite complicated sometimes. So what's she meant to live on while she waits for the first payment? The ongoing problems all extend from that initial problem, imho.
Even if you're on JSA, if you ring up and say "I have a job, I start today", the JSA stops straight away. So does everything else you get - housing benefit, council tax benefit. How are you meant to live until your first pay comes in? UC is much better in that regard, because it's calculated based on the income you actually receive (as opposed to earn) in the period.0 -
I didn't like her job. It was commission based, so she only got paid depending on how much she brought in. No PAYE, no HMRC, so she had to self declare her earnings. These kinds of jobs should be outlawed, imho, and the companies should have to at least guarantee the NMW for the hours the person is on the job trying to sell whatever product or service the company is peddling.
They are (outlawed) and they must (pay the minimum wage). Assuming this was an employee or a worker. Commission can be counted towards the NMW (now the Living Wage). It cannot replace the requirement to pay it.
I would lay bets that the work was also not meeting the legal test for self-employment either.0 -
i have no qualms about the genuine people in our society that need help with various benefits.But why dont they put lists up in the townhall of the people who are on these benefits so they are open for anyone to see to see.
I think you would see a lot of the genuine fraudsters dont want to see their names highlighted in the town hall, i see them walking around my town on pip the higher rate & they are walking perfectly ok, because they think that people dont know about it , im pretty sure i wouldnt want my name up on the town hall wall unless i was really genuine.
You would need one hell of a wall in the town/city hall for this.
Are disabled people not allowed privacy?
Why not also put what medical condition they suffer with as well, just in case they don't walk with a stick to satisfy you to ensure they are entitled.
Whilst we are doing this, why not list every work shy JSA claimer, that has never worked a day in their life.
Why not list everyones annual salary and how much tax they have paid to see who should have better services from the council.
Need I go on!0 -
She was offered some work. She decided she wanted to do it and got the job centre's permission. As I understand it, as long as they approve the work it is permitted work.
She wasn't doing supported permitted work - what I said was she was in the support group for ESA, not the WRAG. The way she understood it, because she was in the support group, she said the job centre told her she could earn up to x amount of pounds and work whatever hours she needed to. Hence her declaring her earnings but not her hours. I think though there would still have been a restriction on the number of hours.
She's being asked to repay some of the ESA because her earnings were too much in some of the weeks she worked. Fair enough. But at the same time, if she declared her earnings, why didn't the DWP reduce her ESA accordingly at the time?
To me, if someone is well enough to work more than two days a week, then why should they get ESA? At least for the weeks where they can work more than 16 hours a week, even if that isn't every week.
My point was people get all these benefits, but they are not on top of things like how to transition out of them. And there's a cash flow problem. She didn't receive her first pay from her work until six weeks later. It's the nature of commission work. The payment plans are quite complicated sometimes. So what's she meant to live on while she waits for the first payment? The ongoing problems all extend from that initial problem, imho.
Even if you're on JSA, if you ring up and say "I have a job, I start today", the JSA stops straight away. So does everything else you get - housing benefit, council tax benefit. How are you meant to live until your first pay comes in? UC is much better in that regard, because it's calculated based on the income you actually receive (as opposed to earn) in the period.
Your friend, or the jobcentre, understood wrong. Whichever group you're in - WRAG or Support - you can only earn up to £115 and work less than sixteen hours for it to be permitted work. You need to get permission in advance. The difference between the groups is that in the WRAG you can only do permitted work for a year, for the Support group it can go on indefinitely.Unless I say otherwise 'you' means the general you not you specifically.0 -
i have no qualms about the genuine people in our society that need help with various benefits.But why dont they put lists up in the townhall of the people who are on these benefits so they are open for anyone to see to see.
I think you would see a lot of the genuine fraudsters dont want to see their names highlighted in the town hall, i see them walking around my town on pip the higher rate & they are walking perfectly ok, because they think that people dont know about it , im pretty sure i wouldnt want my name up on the town hall wall unless i was really genuine.
Wow... perhaps you could get it tattooed on their foreheads too.0 -
-
Not to mention the potential for chaos. 'Oh look, someone called John Smith is on benefits, it must be the John Smith I know so I'll report him'... genuinely ill John Smith gets investigated for fraud whilst healthy John Smith on the other side of town wonders why neighbours tut every time he jogs past.
Or would you have addresses too? Might as well just paint a big red cross on doors 'burgle here, resident unable to defend themselves'. Even worse if the list is split into categories.
It has to be one of the more bonkers ideas posted on MSE.Unless I say otherwise 'you' means the general you not you specifically.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards