onlineFOCUS - News and Stuff For Rochford District

8 Responses to “Out Of Work?”

1. 
   1
   Corey:
   June 2nd, 2009 at 06:06

   As I currently work in the Fraud Department of a local authority investigating Housing and Council Tax Benefit Fraud and have powers that enable me to investigate DWP benefits, prior to this working as a Claim Processor for the DWP, I am fairly qualified to comment on this post.

   In order to claim a contribution based DWP benefit (JSA (C), the former Incapacity benefit and ESA), the last two RITYS (Relevent Income Tax Years) are looked at, in those 2 years adequate NI contributions must be paid at a class 1 rate (employed), Self Employed generally pay class 2 contributions which are adequate for State Pension, but not contribution based benefits.

   Savings and earnings DO play a part in benefits - as a married person he would not receive £64.30 as that is what a single person claiming would get, he would have had to put in a joint claim for benefit affording him £100.95 in benefit. Generally, part time earning, may have an effect on the amount of benefit paid. Savings under £6,000 would not necessarily affect benefit, but savings over £16,000 would give you a nil entitlement to benefit. There is usally a sliding scale for reduction of benefit from £6,000 to the £16,000 threshold.

   If anyone disagrees with a decision whether it be from the DWP of their Local Authority, they have the right of appeal, but this must be made in writing within one calendar month of date of notification to the relevant agency.

2. 
   2
   Chris Black:
   June 2nd, 2009 at 07:06

   Thanks for the details Corey. So have the Guardian got this wrong?

3. 
   3
   Corey:
   June 2nd, 2009 at 07:06

   I would say they have Chris.

4. 
   4
   Michael:
   June 2nd, 2009 at 08:06

   Corey i beleive that you are mixing up the contribution based and the income based JSA. The Contribution based JSA is not means tested as the extraxt from the CAB below states.

   The two types of Jobseeker’s Allowance

   There are two types of Jobseeker’s Allowance, contribution-based (non-means-tested) Jobseeker’s Allowance and income-based (means-tested) Jobseeker’s Allowance. When you apply for Jobseeker’s Allowance, the Jobcentre Plus office will work out which type you should be paid. You may get contribution-based Jobseeker’s Allowance on its own, income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance on its own, or a mixture of contribution-based and income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance.

   Contribution-based Jobseeker’s Allowance

   Whether you get contribution-based Jobseeker’s Allowance will depend on your national insurance contributions. If you have been working and paying national insurance contributions within the last couple of years, you may qualify.
   Contribution-based Jobseeker’s Allowance is not affected by any savings you have. However, if you have part-time earnings or an occupational or personal pension, this may affect how much contribution-based JSA you get. For example, the amount of contribution-based JSA that you get is cut pound for pound for any occupational pension that is over £50 a week. If you earn too much, you will not get contribution-based Jobseeker’s Allowance at all.
   You only get contribution-based Jobseeker’s Allowance for yourself, so you do not get an amount for your partner if you are claiming as a member of a couple. However, you may get income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance on top of your contribution-based Jobseeker’s Allowance if you have a partner, or because of your personal circumstances - for example, if you are disabled or caring for a disabled person or have housing costs.
   Contribution-based Jobseeker’s Allowance is paid for a maximum of six months. After that, you may get income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance, depending on your income and savings.

   Income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance

   You may get income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance if you do not have enough national insurance contributions to get contribution-based Jobseeker’s Allowance. You can also get it on top of contribution-based Jobseeker’s Allowance because you have a partner, or because of other personal circumstances -for example, if you are disabled or caring for a disabled person or have housing costs. Whether you can get income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance depends on the amount of your income and capital.

5. 
   5
   Corey:
   June 2nd, 2009 at 09:06

   With all due respect Michael, I deal with benefits for a living - although my area of expertise is in Housing and Council Tax benefits, I do also work alongside the DWP on joint working cases and am empowered to investigate all DWP benefits - you are correct with regards to longevity of contribution based JSA. As I mentioned in my original post any contribution based benefit is decided on RITYS - it is simply a case of missing one NIC during that two year period will result in insufficient credits to allow benefit payment (nb: as companies have 9 months by law to provide NIC data at the end of the financial year - the current NICs that count are 2007/2008 and 2006/2007.

   I question how upto date the information you posted (which was obtained via the Citizens Advice Bureau website) is! Rules are changing regularly, and as the CAB do not post a date they updated this information, I would not hold it as being 100% reliable.

   All claims for JSA are evaluated on Contributions first, if criteria is not met, then automatically evaluated on Income Based. Therefore on that basis all partners have to put on the claim - in that regard it is a joint claim and he would receive the married persons allowance. As he has not been awarded benefit, and based on the information given in the paper. These would be my findings as an Investigator in the Benefits Sector.

   1. He has not paid sufficient NICs in the relevant RITYS - therefore no entitlement to JSA (C). He would have received it if he had.

   2. Wifes earnings and savings exceed limits, therefore not entitled to JSA (IB).

   3. Entitled to Credits only claim to JSA. This means he will still be receiving NI credits to ensure 100% SRP.

6. 
   6
   Michael:
   June 2nd, 2009 at 09:06

   Yes but the guardian story was about, as far as I remember, people who had paid the full NIC contributions. I will re-read the story (if it is still on the net as I no longer have the paper) and if i am wrong will post again.

   I am not disagreeing about your expertise in any area but just the comemnt that the Guardian story was wrong.

7. 
   7
   Michael:
   June 2nd, 2009 at 09:06

   I have just re-read the article and it is as I remeber.

   Although Mr Freedman had only been in the job he was made redundant from for 14 months he had previously been working as the article states that it was his first time out of work since he was 24 (he is now 38). I have taken this to mean his national insurance is fully paid up for those 14 years. He would then be entitled to contributions based JSA which, the CAB states, is not means tested and is for £64.30 per week.

   You can also check this on the government sites as well, but as withall government sites it is not nearly as clearly put as the CAB site.

   As you say, if Mr Freedman had not had paid the required NIC contributions he would then have to claim Income Related JSA.

8. 
   8
   Corey:
   June 2nd, 2009 at 09:06

   Unfortunately the Guardian doesn’t tell us the type of employment he has been doing? If he had been an employee without break he would have sufficient RITYS as class 1 contributions would have been paid - I wonder if he was a contractor/self employed prior to this spell of employment - if that is the case, he would have paid class 2 contributions which unfortunately do not count for anything except State Retirement Pension (which many self employed are not made aware of).

Leave a Reply

Choose the layout you want to see

• Basic-Onlinefocus Black-And-White default Easy-To-Read Investigator mandigo OpenAir page-style primepress this-just-in tulip-time-05

Who we are

We are Liberal Democrat councillors and campaigners in Rochford District.
We want to improve local decision-making and we see onlineFOCUS as a good way of keep residents informed and involved.
Please click here to email us or click here for our other contact details.

Daily reporting by :
Chris_Black

Daytime support from :
Bruce_Smart

Plus contributions from :
Jackie_Dillnutt
Chris_Lumley
June_Lumley
Mike_Nobes
Ron_Oatham
Chris_Stanley

Recent Posts

• A Cycle Route - And Some Local History
• Do You Know This Stray Cat In Bardfield Way?
• Domino’s Opens In Rayleigh
• A Puzzle For The Weekend - Tại sao bầu trời có các màu sắc khác nhau?
• Stambridge Mills Application
• Supporting John Mason
• The Best Photo Of Hullbridge - Ever ?
• A Teddy Bears Picnic
• Recycling : We Can’t Say Much For Now
• Rawreth Resumes

Legal Statement for the purposes of complying with electoral law: This website is published and promoted by Ron Oatham, 8 Brixham Close , Rayleigh Essex on behalf of Liberal Democrat Candidates all at 8 Brixham Close. The technology and hosting used for this website is provided by 1&1 Internet Limited, The Nova Building, Herschel Street Slough SL1 1XS

Technical Help : Graham Osborn

Posts with Most Comments

• Downhall Under Fives - 70 comments
• The Officers' Report On Asda Deliveries Application - 66 comments
• Any Thoughts On the State Of Sweyne Park? - 52 comments
• New Housing - The Debate Hots Up - 47 comments
• New Asda Rayleigh - 41 comments
• Priory Chase and Temple Way..... - 41 comments
• A Chance For Dialogue - 39 comments
• Anger In Hullbridge - 39 comments
• Asda Apply Again for A 24 Hour Alcohol License - 38 comments
• MPs Expenses : Over To You , Mark! - 38 comments
• 3 Retail Applications in Downhall And Rawreth - 36 comments
• Meltdown Monday - 35 comments
• LDF Plan Approved by District Council 23-4 [Updated] - 33 comments
• Next Wednesday's Cabinet 3: - Great Wakering Youth Provision - 32 comments
• Landslides In Rayleigh, Earthquake in Hullbridge. - 32 comments
• New Football Pitches - Here Are The Proposals - 31 comments
• Well Done To Asda - 31 comments
• Officers Report on the Sports Pitches Application- No Conditions On Times - 31 comments
• An Interesting Meeting.... - 30 comments
• Another Letter From Coral - Now No Flats Included ! - 30 comments

From the Echo

• Teenager wins £4million compensation from Rochford Hospital
• Stambridge Mill owners put in plan for new homes
• Classic car goes up in flames in Hockley
• Teen left with broken jaw after Rayleigh attack
• Tribute to Rochford crash victim
• Updated: Man dies after crash in Rochford
• Burglary suspect from Rayleigh wanted by police
• Thieves admit taking lead from masonic lodge roof
• Online petition over Rollacity roller-rink scheme in Rochford
• Mental health clubs will not close for now

RDC Hot Topics

• Statement on Circuses
• Options for the allocation of land - view comments submitted
• Update on Coombes Farm planning application - decision issued
• Update on Rectory Road / Main Road, South Hawkwell - decision issued
• Brays Lane Planning Application

RDC: News

• Rochford District Council's recycling scheme wins again!
• New online guide for banners and signs
• Landlords encouraged to get seal of approval
• Beverley Folkard exhibition
• Rochford District Council - Delivering 24/7/365 services