Previous employer refuses to furlough. No income! Help!

poppy12345

Don't shoot the messenger, i just give the advice, i don't make the rules! She's asked her previous employer and the answer was no. She has savings of more than £16,000 which excludes her from means tested benefits. New style JSA is what she needs to look at claiming. What other advice would you like?

sharpe106

geoff258 said:

She left her previous employment with a new job ready to go to, and now has no income and can't be furloughed, she is at no fault. What is the matter with you?

Neither is it the government fault. Any scheme will have winners and losers, name one government scheme that does not. It is impossible to treat everybody the same. She is lucky she has money, which is much better then a lot of others. The government has always advised people to have a rainy day fund.

geoff258

It might be nice if people agreed that the system could be fair, rather than coming out with the 'someone always loses' crap..

Are you personally losing out ?

sharpe106

geoff258 said:

It might be nice if people agreed that the system could be fair, rather than coming out with the 'someone always loses' crap..

Are you personally losing out ?

Everybody agrees the system could be fairer and better. But we do not make the policy or the rules. We are just stating what they are and why they are unlikely to change.

gary83

A lot of this isn’t fair, It’s a pandemic. 16,000 people have died in the U.K.

Do you think there should be no savings criteria for Universal Credit? Should there be a higher limit or none at all? everyone should get the taxpayer to fund everything and leave their savings untouched in the bank? 

Benefits are supposed to be a safety net, provided by the government and the taxpayer for the people that need it most. The government assume if you have over £16,000 sat in the bank that you don’t need their safety net, I think thats  a pretty reasonable  assumption.

Hauzen

geoff258 said:

She has had the money for a while but it  seems grossly unfair to have to live on money that was gifted to set up their daughters future life, all because the governments system has left her high and dry. Meanwhile there are far less deserving people furloughed and coining £7500 for 3 months sunning themselves in the garden, Does that seem fair?

Her decision to leave her previous job.
Her new employer's decision not to start her in post.
Don't see how it's the government that "has left her high and dry". She'll be fine with the level of savings she has which is good news.

geoff258

It would be fairer if people who had over £16000 in the bank used that to live on rather than being furloughed at the governments expense. You think it's fair for people to have to eat into their life savings while others get handed out £7500 for staying at home?

poppy12345

geoff258 said:

It would be fairer if people who had over £16000 in the bank used that to live on rather than being furloughed at the governments expense. You think it's fair for people to have to eat into their life savings while others get handed out £7500 for staying at home?

Why should people who have savings not be furloughed? Being furloughed isn't means tested.

gary83

The point of savings are that they’re there to be used when you need them. Incidentally you are annoyed at the government for writing too many loopholes, you don’t seem to be blaming her previous employer for not keeping her on & furloughing her? 

Would you be happier if everyone got nothing? At least that would be fair.

geoff258

Maybe it should be. Why should a millionaire get £2500 a month effectively for nothing while my friend can't get £95 pw because she got some hard earned savings over £16 k?