Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SueP1944

  1. Somewhere in the back of my mind this situation was mentioned on Rightsnet.com. If I remember the argument, the Welfare Rights Officer was not very happy that two cases were to be heard at the same time. An old ESA claim and one that was made some months later on grounds of a deterioration. It was felt that the two cases if heard together might prejudice each other. The Welfare Rights Officer objected to this happening and in the interest of justice had the two cases heard on different days with a different panel. I could see this happening with your case. Two totally different sets of criteria being rolled into one hearing. Recipe for a disaster. Have a word with CAB or whatever, and I think you will find that you should be objecting to this ever happening. Justice should not only be done, it must also be SEEN to be done. How you are going to argue on two totally different benefits without getting yourself tied up in knots at the same time worries me. Google Rightsnet - see what you come up with. Good Luck
  2. Has this not been mentioned? I can't find a reference to it. But as she is pleading guilty before the Magistrates, it is a strong possibility that the case may be sent to Crown for sentencing by the Magistrates. Crown having more powers to sentence more harshly, also have the power to reduce what a Magistrate may impose. I have been out of this for years but I thought that you could elect to go to Crown instead of Magistrates and know that at least you will get a fair hearing of the mitigation by an experienced Judge instead of somebody that sits a couple of times a year as a Magistrate and runs a pub full time! I know that if ever I was charged with theft and fraud I would sooner take my chances with a Judge than a Magistrate. I know too many of them and how they think!!!
  3. Why? There aren't any jobs! Many have been looking for months and still unemployed.
  4. Oh my other half will want to read all about this! What on earth is the Civil Service coming to? He is a retired senior Civil Servant (retired Dec 09) at age 60 and 6 months. He thought about staying on part time on half hours for half pay + pension, but he had had enough. Too many targets, his time wasn't his own anymore. He was paid to do a job, but spent half of it controlling his staff with reports for this and reports for that. Oh those days when he used to say that being in the Service was like being with a large family. He used to spend time having a cuppa and a smoke thinking about how he would deal with his next case. He would go for a 15 min walk to clear his head. Nope he is well out of it if what is happening is the way things are now.
  5. What you are told and what actually happens is generally miles apart. The ESA113 is supposed to be sent out when the Decision Maker is looking to allow ESA based only on the ESA50, but needs a little more confirmatory evidence. Whether that happens is another matter. The DWP readilly admit that they would prefer an ATOS report over a GP report any day. I have noticed that the ESA113 has now been changed to reflect the new descriptors that came into force in March this year. The old style ESA113, was more condition and illness related. The new one is asking the GP to comment more on the patients ability to perform the various tasks. How the GP will know that is another matter. I see this as a very subtle way of getting the GP to look at your inability to do any work especially when the MED3 (sick note) is completed. It is asking the GP to view his/her patient through similar eyes that ATOS do. This I presume is suggesting that the GP take more care when issuing MED3's out in future, and not issue them willy nilly for everyone that has a bad back, a headache, a strained muscle and of the course a bout of flu!
  6. Yes I know it was wrong advice, but my father didn't tell me until he had paid for it himself. He also has an open coal fire, but nothing was said about that.
  7. Warm Front do! They were given a big pot of money and told to share it out with those that came within the scheme. Out of that pot they were allowed to keep a % as their commission for organising the scheme on behalf of the government. If the full amount was not taken up because you didn't at that time come within the full scheme (although there are many examples around that WF say you can't have it when infact you can, but they rely on your limited knowledge of the scheme) WF are are 'bending' the contract to suit themselves in order to push up their income. They keep the difference. If you then need further help, and if the scheme was running as it was, you would re-apply, and if lucky be given another £3500. They would take away what you have used already, leaving you with the balance to go against the new work. In your case you would be allowed £3200, and say that the work came to £2000, they would keep the £1200!! So be thankful that you may contributed to one of the director/shateholders new swimming pool!!!
  8. I presume you were talking about my father's boiler. If not, I'm sorry if I have confused the issue. His boiler whilst working was condemned by British Gas as dangerous. They put a tag around the inlet supply and a long sticker on the face of the boiler. So whilst it would still work it was illegal to have it in operation. As with the original question, efficiency is why the whole scheme started. If you have a fire that loses some 50%+ of the heat up the chimney, it should be replaced. Whether it works or not is immaterial, it is all down to the safety aspect and tha Energy Ratings..
  9. Warm Front are nothing more than a company, a private agency run for profit out of the distribution of grants. They have the 'customers' who request work to be done within the terms of the scheme. They contract out the work that they say the scheme allows for. They do not ask the government for a bit here and a bit there depending on what work is coming up over the next month. They were appointed by the government to run the scheme and were given a 'pot' of money to have the scheme work. The government were more than happy as the cost to the taxpayer was less this way than if it had been organised by a government department. Nothing different than having ATOS run the medical side of benefits. Likewise the various 'charities' that used to run the Pathway Scheme for JSA claimants. They were paid a pot of money to provide the scheme. Scheme didn't work, but the charities kept the money! Warm Front take their 'profit' as being the commission agreed with the government plus any left over (total grant allowed less cost of work completed). In my father's case, he had a condemned boiler (rust on the exhaust vent). They refused to carry out any work even though he came within many of the allowed conditions viz. nearly 90, receives Attendance Allowance at the highest rate etc. Reason: the boiler still worked. They only repair/replace boilers that are not working. You find that restriction mentioned anywhere - It doesn't exist! He was clearly entitled to a new boiler under the scheme. He was made to feel that he wasn't entitled so off he went and had one put in out of his own money - £2,000 (what bit he had of it!) He just believed they were being honest and right. I knew different and as you have pointed out, they are very deceptive. In his case they clocked up another £3600 which they didn't need to pay out.
  10. Isn't this the ESA113 form? From what I know and have had letters from the DWP about this with regards to my husband's problems, they very rarely send these out. I wanted to know why my husband didn't have one sent out. I was told that the ATOS assessment is more reliable than what a GP could say! http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/esa113-interactive.pdf
  11. Being of an age where working doesn't affect us anymore as I am nearer to 70 than 60 and my husband not that far behind me and is chronically ill, I have just had a look at the Jobcentre website as I can't believe that there aren't any jobs. I put my postcode in, asked for a max of 5 miles to where I live and asked for any job. We live in a rural area with the nearest town 10 miles away and a city 70 miles away. The result, nine pages of jobs came up! Most are paid at the NMW but surely that is far far better than what you are getting on benefits isn't it?
  12. Thankyou We are waiting to see the senior GP with PALS at the end of the month. I note your comments about repeat prescriptions. No the GP has never had either of us in. I've been on my medication with no change since 2003, and my husband on his since April 2004 when he came out of hospital. My repeat list is two pages long and his runs into 5!! We just keep taking the pills. Incidentally and I didn't really want to say this, but because he takes upwards of 100mgs of Morphine every 12 hours he is now addicted to them. He should only be taking 70mgs, but needs the extra to make them work. He also finds that Oramorph works quicker and better. But that has nothing to do with this thread. Going to a court hearing is the last thing either of us wants or feels able to cope with. We were told about them before but we put in new claims instead of appealing.
  13. The 6 month rule is there for two reasons I believe. one, as it is based on your past contributions, there has to come a time when you have had enough back. two, the government consider that 6 months should be long enough for the average person to find some type, any type of job.
  14. I am presuming that you are receiving MED3 forms from your GP? (sick notes). And I presume you are handing them over to your employer? OK, when your SSP comes to an end you will have to claim ESA (sick pay) from the DWP. You will have to send the DWP your sicknote and fill out a form.
  15. Am I right in thinking that you are aware of the debt, that you accept that it has to be repaid? If so, how can you be in hardship by not receiving a backdated payment? You have lived so far on the assessment rate and have been paying the debt back at £4.50pw. The backdated payment is an 'extra' payment and has nothing to do with your current and future financial position. What were you intending to do with the £1200 if you didn't pay off the debt? In fact you are going to be at least £25pw better off than you have already! Given that, I can't see how paying the debt back in full out of this unepected bonus will affect you, unless I have missed something. With it paid off you will be another £4.50pw better off as well. It seems the most logical thing to do. No more worry, no more debt and be at least £30pw better off than you have been in the past. Besides which, do you think it fair that the DWP continue to accept your £4.50pw for as long as it takes to clear the debt, yet take the whole of the £1200 underpayment to spend as you wish?
  16. And so it should be the case!! But if you go by Nystagmite's opinion you should get nowt because you have dared to not follow the 'yellow brick road' aka the RULES!!
  17. LOL!!! But you do jest!!! I'll bet the tenner that I have in my purse that this has already been done!!
  18. And that is the sum total of your opinion in this matter? You wouldn't be Osbourne actually, but posting under a pen name by any chance? But i still pose the question, would the government actually allow this family to starve and be homeless if their circumstances were different? I believe they would. No one should be made to work or look for it. Obviously if they don't then they can't expect any financial help. But in this case the husband is looking for work and signing on, yet he doesn't get any help either because of a choice made by his wife. Oh I see, what we need is a piece of 4x2 with the husband walking behind her all the way to the Jobcentre every week in order to claim some money! Would you not think that that might be viewed as maybe intimidation or maybe kidnapping or maybe marital abuse?
  19. If you reverse your statement you will see that it makes no sense whatsoever. If you (and her) want the money, you must do what the government says you need to do, but No-one is forcing her to look for work!!!! How you can make that statement and not laugh!!! Precisely what is the Government making her do for some financial help? I wont say anything else.
  20. I don't judge people and neither do I expect or accept being judged. I just try to see what is fair, equitable and just. As I have said, maybe I have the views of an old dinosaur, but those same views, opinions and thoughts have provided us with a good marriage that has just seen it pass the 40 year mark! I would also say that they have provided our daughter with a good basis to start her married life. She had a good grammer school education which led to 5 excellent A level grades. Her options were to progress through university or, as she put it, have the same type of marriage and life that she was brought up in. She chose marriage at 18, followed by three children. She has never worked in her life and know that she would have no intention of doing so. At 38, she views life as a mother and a full time housewife. None of this what the government are suggesting is good for marriage. Why should your wife be forced to sign on as unemployed and look for work when she already has a full time (unpaid) job? The strange thing is that if you were not treated as a couple, you could make a single person's claim. So maybe the answer is that you divorce! It is no wonder that it is accepted now that people can have a constant stream of short term relationships, producing probably children all with different fathers. Even the government are encouraging that way of life, that is if you want to be able to claim some benefits! Do the right thing, and you are penalised. I still can't see why you should not be able to claim a single persons benefit instead of the larger, couple rate.
  21. This has me confused! So this poor guy who is looking for work has to have his wife sign on as looking for work also (unless she is exempt) before they can have any money. His wife has no intention of looking for a job which is her choice. She refuses to sign on and is sanctioned and eventually the claim is closed. In the meantime the poor guy is still looking for work, yet will receive no financial help to provide for his family. The very least that should happen is that he be paid at the single rate instead of the couple rate by virtue of his efforts to look for work and wanting to comply in every respect with his JS agreement. So the question that must be asked is how does he support himself financially? He isn't allowed to make a single claim. Is it the intention that the government are going to force them to either become homeless, beg on the streets or enter a life of crime? What a country - we are no better than a third world one if that is what will be allowed to happen! Thank goodness we are of an age that this sort of thing will not affect us. If we were younger and in that situation, I wouldn't want to look for work either. I have never worked since I was married and then had the children. Maybe I am an old dinosaur and think that the husband is responsible for providing for the family.
  22. You do seem to be having a problem don't you. Have you not thought about contacting DIAL or AGEUK?
  23. Are you talking about the winter period? Those over 60 get £250 and those over 80 get £400 to cover the cost of the winter quarter. There really is no need for anybody over 60 not to have a least 2 warm rooms throughout winter.
  24. I am shocked!!!! Although this does not affect us as we are too old to work, but to try and attain a saving of money by setting people up is disgusting. Mind you none of this surprises me at all. The whole Civil Service has been target driven for a number of years. My husband has friends that have worked in the 'Service' and are now retired. What I can say that other departments (i can't name them for obvious reasons) have certainly tightened up their targets to ensure that the required level of savings are achieved (25%). This is done by still applying the working regulations, but now interpreting them in a slightly different way that brings more money in. Emphasis is placed on each officer to produce results that are set by his/her line manager. It goes all the way up to the top, as line managers have to produce results for the office. All of this is linked into each officers annual report that will show two things. One that he/she has attained the targets set at the start of the year and two, it sets the target for the forthcoming year. Failing these targets can result in disciplinary action for inefficiency!
  25. Sorry it's not your condition that concerns me, it is the disability benefit that you had to have had in order to claim the disability element. From what I gather so far, you are limited to one year of that element for tax credits if you had either IB or ESA beforehand, or if you have DLA, then the element goes for the same period you continue to get that benefit.
  • Create New...