Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About frances1p

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Many thanks for your replies.  I have followed your advic in post 1 and written to DWP for statement of reasons etc.

    However, your 2nd reply, which quotes parts of the legislation/ policy for the grant, seems very clear with regards to the 'exceptions' for having another child in family (under 16) in stating you must not be the parent of or other exceptions in terms of multiple births etc?

    However, a  further publication 'Restricting payment of the Sure Start Maternity Grant to the first child' [Equality Impact Assessment - January 2011 (DWP)' gives very clear & specific guidance in its definition of a 'first time mother' being awarded the grant.  Even if their are other children in the family from her partners previous relationship.  It seems to suggest that provided children under 16 living with them, are from the 'fathers previous relationship, if the woman is then pregnant with her 'first child' a payment would be due?

    It also states, that if the circumstances reversed, and it was the fathers first child, a payment would not be due.


    All a bit misleading, as in the one hand there are very clear and specific circumstances related to other children of the family etc which seem to contradict the situation above?


    confusing really?  But thanks for the advice.  Very helpful.

  2. I recently applied for a Sure Start Maternnity Grant and received a decision from the DWP today, declining my eligibility; under the basis that there is another child (under 16) in my family/ household. My situation is this, I am co-habitating with my partner/ father of my new/ first baby. Within the last 10 months, my partner's daughter from previous relationship (age 13) had to be removed from her mothers care, owing to domestic violence issues. The family Courts are still dealing with the situation as her mother is contesting her daughter residing with us, as she wa
  3. I just spoke to the LGO enquiry line. I asked about the frequency in publishing their decisions online? They said: quote "we dont publish all decisions, those that we do publish are posted online in batches, every 3 months (on the closest Wednesday to the 3 mth period?). If this is correct, then it really allows them to 'cherry pick' which decisions they publish, putting them in a good light - or appearing impartial? The whole point I have with my own particular complaint/ referral to LGO/ their decision/ their decision review - is that I feel they have clearly been biased towards me i
  4. That's strange? I wonder if they have a schedule for publishing decisions in batches? eg: decisions published every 20 days etc? I shall make enquiries and report back here as to my findings? BRB ..................... thank you
  5. Thank you for your response, sorry it taken a while for me to revisit and respond accordingly. Anyway, your suggestion re the published Ombudsman Decisions, is an excellent idea and I am happy to provide the reference for you to view it online - the reference is : Complaint against: London Borough of Bromley Complaint Reference: 16 010 559 Date: 27 March 2018 I look forward to your feedback after reading the complaint/ decision, after which there are a few points I will raise, which has meant my not being treated fairly - but I shall wait until you have had the opportunity
  6. Hi there - hope somebody may be able to help? It is in relation to the Local Government Ombudsmen - Decision Review? Following a complaint to my local authority, which dragged on for approx 16 months at Stage 1 and they refused to allow me to access my rights to progress to Stage 2 of the Statutory Complaints Procedure, I referred the matter to the LGO. Long story short, I was not happy with the LGO decision in finding no fault in the Council's actions. I then used the 'LGO DECISION REVIEW PROCESS' to voice the fact I was not happy with this decision and that it was unfair
  • Create New...