Automatic Conversion of Legacy CB ESA to NS ESA.

Newcad

huckster said:

Is the main reason for issuing the new style ESA CC, the declaration about DWP being able to claim back all overpayments, even if these occurred by official error?

No, it's simply a standard condition of NS benefits that all overpayments are recoverable (same as with UC).

So it doesn't matter if the claimant has signed a CC or not, the recovery of overpayments is not even mentioned in anybodys CC.

huckster

Recovery of overpayments is stated in the CC declaration at the end.

Yamor

Newcad said:

There could also be a bit more of a special case and opinion has also been asked on Rightsnet as to whether a change of circumstances entitlement to IR ESA that arose before Dec 1st can still be claimed and backdated.
(Personally I believe that legislation says that can happen, at least between the date of the CofC and 1st Dec, - but it could cause headaches for how that is then backpaid, and whether it could then become UC backdated to 1st Dec. Remembering that no Managed Migration notice will have been issued. I'd say that if it does crop up then it's probably going to be one for the lawyers).

Apparently the DWP have said that they will only allow ir-ESA to be added if the request was made prior to 01/12/25, not if it was asked for afterwards (even though it relates to before that date).

TimeLord1

Umm 🤔 Still, it seems saving money will have some future legal issues.  For me, I said, 'Years ago, it's simply a name change for ESA to add New Style.' I had journal messages, two letters, and a phone call to do the claimant commitment. So now people will just be sent one letter stating your ESA is now NSESA. Unfair on those who had to wait weeks and go through the process.   Still, when have they done anything straightforward?

We will probably see issues arise in the coming months. Even with medication and NHS treatments. Not allowed is trending nationwide.

Newcad

Yamor said:said:

Apparently the DWP have said that they will only allow ir-ESA to be added if the request was made prior to 01/12/25, not if it was asked for afterwards (even though it relates to before that date)

What the DWP thinks and says (to make headlines) is often at odds with what the actual benefit legislation says.

Guess which one wins at tribunal/ in court and then the DWP has to back down.

(But people remember the headlines and not the climbdown)

Newcad

Newcad said:

Not quite, it's simply preventing any new claims for IR ESA  as from 1st Dec 2025.

Any existing CB ESA + IR ESA claims that are still to be migrated are not affected by that.*

TimeLord1 said:

Back to the thread, will they have to do a claimant commitment? Tick box phone call or just get a letter stating your legacy ESA has been converted to NSESA. Makes a mockery if they omitted the process but do it for migration claims. Unsure how that will work out; maybe someone will experience it.  Sounds very cheesy. 😁

It turns out to be a bit more complicated that what I said there, and it might have affected some legacy CB+IR ESA if the CB amount was more than the IR amount.
(Off the top of my head- a single person with CB-ESA SG with just the EDP as the IR component would have been affected if not already migrated).

I found this ADM memo which explains what has, and still is, happening.
ADM Memo 12/25 - "Next Stage of the Abolition of Legacy Benefits":
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/691f05c7c62d57eb3a710802/adm-memo-12-25.pdf

See paragraphs 5 & 6 for the 01 December abolishing of Legacy CB ESA and conversion to NS ESA.

Para 7 explains why they are not (yet) asking for NS ESA Claimant Commitments.

Paras 8-11 say that both IB-JSA and IS will be abolished on 1st April 2026 (or if it's already being Managed Migrated to UC then at the end of the 2-week run on if that is later).

The remainder deals with special cases of HB claimants leaving 'Specified' or Temporary accommodation to go to 'General' accomodation.

Yamor

Technically speaking, where the c-ESA is more than the ir-ESA, then there is only an actual award of c-ESA, as the whole award is attributed to the c-ESA. See subsection (4) here:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2007/5/section/6

In a case where a single claimant is entitled to the support component, then that is included in both the ir-ESA, and the c-ESA, so that wouldn't mean the c-ESA would be greater than the ir-ESA.

huckster

I would expect the number of remaining claims not yet moved to UC would be quite small.

The number living in specified or temporary accommodation and still on legacy benefits would be a low number, but probably quite difficult to manage through these changes.

TimeLord1

Newcad said:

Newcad said:

Not quite, it's simply preventing any new claims for IR ESA as from 1st Dec 2025.

Any existing CB ESA + IR ESA claims that are still to be migrated are not affected by that.*

TimeLord1 said:

Back to the thread, will they have to do a claimant commitment? Tick box phone call or just get a letter stating your legacy ESA has been converted to NSESA. Makes a mockery if they omitted the process but do it for migration claims. Unsure how that will work out; maybe someone will experience it.  Sounds very cheesy. 😁

It turns out to be a bit more complicated that what I said there, and it might have affected some legacy CB+IR ESA if the CB amount was more than the IR amount.
(Off the top of my head- a single person with CB-ESA SG with just the EDP as the IR component would have been affected if not already migrated).

I found this ADM memo which explains what has, and still is, happening.
ADM Memo 12/25 - "Next Stage of the Abolition of Legacy Benefits":
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/691f05c7c62d57eb3a710802/adm-memo-12-25.pdf

See paragraphs 5 & 6 for the 01 December abolishing of Legacy CB ESA and conversion to NS ESA.

Para 7 explains why they are not (yet) asking for NS ESA Claimant Commitments.

Paras 8-11 say that both IB-JSA and IS will be abolished on 1st April 2026 (or if it's already being Managed Migrated to UC then at the end of the 2-week run on if that is later).

The remainder deals with special cases of HB claimants leaving 'Specified' or Temporary accommodation to go to 'General' accomodation.

So the secretary of state. 

Just suspend the claimant commitment until it is added as a to do ?  Or a letter with a phone appointment. It did seem odd that people would just avoid the process and carry on just with the title change.  

With the greater amounts, income related. I wonder if that will unexempt people from prescriptions and dental treatment. Unless they're exempt sounds that could become a grey area of understanding.

Newcad

huckster said:

I would expect the number of remaining claims not yet moved to UC would be quite small.

The number living in specified or temporary accommodation and still on legacy benefits would be a low number, but probably quite difficult to manage through these changes.

Apparently there is a big problem in Birmingham with Temporary/Specified accomodation and HB.

"Registered" support landlords with a few sipported/council rented temporary properties but many more general ones have tenants in non-supported properties who have been allowed to claim HB instead of UC.

It appears to have happened over years as people have moved from T/S accommodation into general accomodation but remained on HB. The numbers are in the hundreds if not thousands.

That new measure in the memo would have prevented that from happening.