ESA. Please Help

sportsarb

simpson_77 wrote: »

ok, but is it right that the rest of the claim is written off?

In my experience, yes.

You can’t award a benefit where it is currently ‘awarded’ at nil. So a new claim is necessitated. Essentially the first claim is treated as if it never happened.

If your wife had claimed income related and been entitled to that the process* would have been different.

*assuming that all offices process claims the same way is usually folly so I can only advise how claims were dealt with where I worked.

**also, I’m not sure what you meant by right, procedurally yes it is, morally I’ve always felt it was scummy to punish people in this way.

simpson_77

sportsarb wrote: »

In my experience, yes.

You can’t award a benefit where it is currently ‘awarded’ at nil. So a new claim is necessitated. Essentially the first claim is treated as if it never happened.

If your wife had claimed income related and been entitled to that the process* would have been different.

*assuming that all offices process claims the same way is usually folly so I can only advise how claims were dealt with where I worked.

**also, I’m not sure what you meant by right, procedurally yes it is, morally I’ve always felt it was scummy to punish people in this way.

So there isn't any point in appealing then? bearing in mind this was over £8.40! and the loss is over £1,500

sportsarb

simpson_77 wrote: »

So there isn't any point in appealing then? bearing in mind this was over £8.40! and the loss is over £1,500

I don't want to discourage you from appealing or taking any action that might change things but based on what you've said the conditions don't look to be met, so it would appear to be a fruitless effort. That's without having all the details though as the person making the decision will have access to HMRC and DWP systems, which we don't have.

That being said, as far as mandatory reconsiderations(MR)/appeals go, this is one of the easier ones to make. There are no medical reports, consultants reports etc. like there would be if it was a medical appeal. So you could ring them tomorrow, or it might need to be your partner, and tell them you wish to submit an MR on the basis that you think the conditions are met.

It's then up to the department to review it, and it will be someone different than has made the original decision, so it will have been through another set of eyes at least.

calcotti

simpson_77 wrote: »

2016-17 Full year
You have contributions from
Self-employment: 44 weeks
National Insurance credits: 52 weeks

And what about 17-18? The reason I ask is that if she meets the NI conditions for 16-17 and 17-18 she could, I think, make a new claim and ask for it to be backdated to 7th January 2019.

simpson_77

calcotti wrote: »

And what about 17-18? The reason I ask is that if she meets the NI conditions for 16-17 and 17-18 she could, I think, make a new claim and ask for it to be backdated to 7th January 2019.

2017-18 Full year
You have contributions from

National Insurance credits: 52 weeks

What's the difference between National Insurance Credits and Self Employment?

calcotti

Contributions from self employment will be class 2 contributions she has paid. NI credits are from benefits she has received - is she receiving child benefit for a child under 12?

Based on the information for 16-17 and 17-18 I believe she can claim ESA backdated to 7th January. She may be able to ask them to revise the existing claim with a changed date for the start and to therefore look at these two years but I suspect she may have to make a new claim. Perhaps one of the posters who used to work in ESA can add to this.

simpson_77

thanks, Unfortunately, we aren't entitled to child benefit due to my income 4 children too...

calcotti

simpson_77 wrote: »

thanks, Unfortunately, we aren't entitled to child benefit due to my income 4 children too...

Even if you don’t want to be paid it she can still retain entitlement to CB in order to get the NI Credits. If she is not doing this I don’t know what the NI credits are for.

Looking again at the information about the NI contributions I don’t understand why they refused the initial claim. In both 15-16 and 16-17 it shows that she had 52 weeks of credits so she meets the condition of having at least 50 weeks in both years. In 16-17 she has contributions from self employment for 44 weeks so meets the condition requiring her to have paid at least 26 weeks of contributions in one of these years. Perhaps you should check with DWP what they believed your NI record to show when they made their initial decision.