ESA Permitted Work Average hours/earnings

calcotti

bigbill wrote: »

. . I would say with confidence . ..

Could you elaborate on this.
I've looked at the ADM as referenced above and tried to interpret but I'm not confident that the interpretation is correct.

Do you have experience of a similar situation?

TELLIT01

Vicki1980 wrote: »

Thank you both for your replies.

So I should be ok then and within the rules?

I didn’t know I had to wait for their permission before I started work? The PW1 form states “if you have already started work.......” ??

I'm not surprised that you are confused about telling DWP about Permitted Work. You are absolutely correct that the PW1 form states what you have quoted. Poppy12345 is also correct that guidance states that approval should be obtained before starting work.

That is sadly typical of many areas of documentation within DWP - you will find contradictory information everywhere.
Whether or not you are already working I would call DWP to ask for clarification of the hours/income rules around PW, and how averaging may be used in your situation. You may not get a straight answer but it's worth asking.

poppy12345

You should also be aware that if the work you do contradicts the reasons for your claim, it may go against you when you're next re-assessed.

50Twuncle

poppy12345 wrote: »

You should also be aware that if the work you do contradicts the reasons for your claim, it may go against you when you're next re-assessed.

That is a load of poppycock - many people find that work improves their mental wellbeing !
I did similar - 8 years ago - in fact, I was working on permitted work, until my employer offered me a permanent contract - and YES I am disabled and was on ESA at the time (I am still disabled and have an understanding employer)

So OP - I applaud you - stay working if that is what makes you feel better..

poppy12345

50Twuncle wrote: »

That is a load of poppycock -

No it's not! I never said no one can do permitted work, what i said was that IF it contradicts your reasons for your claim then it can go against you.



The exact same reasons a person working and claiming PIP. Yes people work and claim PIP but if it contradicts the reasons then it's a different story.



If a person claims ESA and is in the Support Group because they can't walk more than 50 metres and they work in a super market, walking around all day then this is contradicting the reasons for their claim. This is just an example of what a contradiction is when claiming a benefit!

pmlindyloo

I agree that the information about this is very confusing. I suspect that a decision maker would 'make the call' in the end as to whether to average out the hours and the earnings by using a defined period.

What concerns me is that the OP, based on her example. would be both exceeding the hours and the earnings limit on two separate occasions.

It would be much simpler, since the earnings are at NMW, for the OP to do overtime which keep them below 16 hrs. perhaps this is something she could discuss with their employer.

If the decision maker decides that any week that exceeds the number of hours means the OP would lose their ESA then this may have implications for housing benefit and council tax reduction (if the OP claims these). Although there may still be entitlement it may mean some aggro.

So, keep it simple.

I also agree with Poppy that being able to work 20 hrs a week may be a factor in any future ESA assessment. In fact, the permitted work form specifies that any information contained in it may be used regarding any benefits being claimed.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/714727/permitted-work-form-pw1.pdf

Of course, if the OP finds that they are able to work more hours without any detrimental effects on their health this would be very good news. Plus, if more hours are available then this could lead to the OP coming off ESA and claiming working tax credits instead, a good result indeed.

calcotti

pmlindyloo wrote: »

...and claiming working tax credits instead, a good result indeed.

or, more likely given the extent of rollout, Universal Credit.

pmlindyloo

calcotti wrote: »

or, more likely given the extent of rollout, Universal Credit.

Indeed Should have mentioned that.

50Twuncle

poppy12345 wrote: »

No it's not! I never said no one can do permitted work, what i said was that IF it contradicts your reasons for your claim then it can go against you.

The exact same reasons a person working and claiming PIP. Yes people work and claim PIP but if it contradicts the reasons then it's a different story.

If a person claims ESA and is in the Support Group because they can't walk more than 50 metres and they work in a super market, walking around all day then this is contradicting the reasons for their claim. This is just an example of what a contradiction is when claiming a benefit!

Try "Receptionist" NOT "Supermarket worker" - a huge difference in required physical effort

You are assuming way too much !

poppy12345

50Twuncle wrote: »

Try "Receptionist" NOT "Supermarket worker" - a huge difference in required physical effort

You are assuming way too much !

What's your problem??? I was purely just saying that as an example!! You're the one that's twisting what i say and assuming way too much, not me!