esa limit to 1 year

[billyt]

just notice the goverment have set a 1 year limit to esa what does this mean

[reallymadwoman]

From what I understood, after 1 year on contribution based ESA, you will have to transfer to means tested ESA if you are eligible.

 

I am one of the people who will be adversely affected by this, and my immediate reaction was that it isn't at all fair. However on further reflection, it is fairer than the existing system. At the moment, anyone who has paid sufficient contributions could in theory get ESA for life at the same rate as everyone else, regardless of the family's circumstances. So person A who's partner works full time and earns £100K gets the same amount as person B who is a single parent with no other income. Under the new system, after 12 months all claimants will only get benefit if their income is low enough to justify it.

[mikejgk]

Have to say reallymadwoman I agree with your take basically on this, though it is high time the capital and income limits for means testing were uprated, as they haven't been for about ten years, I think. There is already a lot of disinformation being put around about this. Some people who qualify because of low income or capital (or both) are worried they will be left penniless after a year. This is not the case, as I understand it, if you still qualify on sickness/disability and means grounds. Those who will be hit are the people who have accumulated savings and have just become sick, as after a year they will not qualify until their savings have reduced to the relevant level - £16K for a single person but with £1 deducted for every £250 over £6K. Oh, and if you try to get rid of your capital before the year's up, it won't work unless there are very good reasons e.g. paying off a debt to reduce interest payments. They will simply deem you to have disposed of capital unjustifiably and it will be taken into account anyway!

[reallymadwoman]

Beware - even paying off debts can be seen as 'deprivation of capital'.

 

In my case I not only have capital way above the means tested limits, I also have a partner in well paid full time employment. This change has helped me make one decision though. When the time comes, I won't be applying to transfer to ESA since even if it was awarded I would only get it for a year and it really isn't worth the hassle. The chances are I'll have to appeal and my year will be up before the appeal is heard and in the meantime I'll have spent hours preparing bits of paper and grovelling to GPs and consultants. I really don't need the money that badly!

[rachmac83]

What about those of us who really do need the money?

 

My partner earns 16000 an this is not enough to cover our expenses

we don't have ant debts apart from our mortgage and we are planning to move to another city where house prices are lower to reduce our mortgage vut in the current market who knows how long this may take

we don't have any savings they have been used to subsidise my earnings but now they have run out.

we wouldn't qualify for any income relate benefit. what are we supposed to do?

 

there is no miracle 12 month cure for most ailments, and until they event one isn't this a bit unrealistic.

if they are going to do this shouldn't they raise the amount of income allowed, they have put a cap of 500 for couples and families well we get half of that, the two are so far apart it doesn't make any sense.

 

i know that this only for those in the WRAG but even those with the most severe disabilities are lucky to that these days.so bar far to many to ill to work are in this group, forcing them into work may bring major health hazards and with this larger NHS costs and cost to employers by employing those who are incapable of sustaining their role.

 

in theory i get the point and if it is applied to those with much higher incomes great, but until they have sorted the ESA system ensuring people are properly assessed and put in the right group it cant possibly carried out effectively.

 

i just don't understand the whole concept of forcing those who are sick and disabled into work or poverty.

[reallymadwoman]

I was treating this entirely separately to the whole problem that the ESA system doesn't work .... which is why I made the decision not to even apply to be transferred.

 

Yes, there are a lot of people who are going to be worse off and the ones it will affect most are those with incomes just above 'poverty level', but I still think it is fairer than the current system where regardless of resources or partner's income you can just go on claiming for life. Why should being ill be treated any differently to being made redundant? You get a cushion of 12 months to sort yourselves out, after which the government will only provide the minimum you need to live on.

 

The whole system does break down if you have to pay a mortgage rather than rent though, and I think they will have to work out some means of taking this into account either by an allowance against your income or by a sliding scale of help as you get with rent.

[wishface]

I wasn't aware ESA had a contribution based element. HOw does that work?

 

Who will be affected? This is a significant issue: if you are ill, being made to look for work after a year is contentious at best.

[honeybee13]

I wasn't aware ESA had a contribution based element. HOw does that work?

 

Who will be affected? This is a significant issue: if you are ill, being made to look for work after a year is contentious at best.

 

This is from the directgov website and there's more information there if people want to read it.

 

HB

 

Entitlement conditions

 

There are two types of Employment and Support Allowance:

 

• contribution-based
  
• income-related
  

Contribution-based Employment and Support Allowance

 

You may be entitled to claim contribution-based Employment and Support Allowance if you have paid enough National Insurance contributions.

Income-based Employment and Support Allowance

 

You may be entitled to claim income-based Employment and Support Allowance if you do not have enough money coming in, or you have not paid enough National Insurance contributions, and you satisfy the entitlement conditions.

This means that you have savings of less than £16,000 and, if you have a partner or civil partner, they work for less than 24 hours a week on average.

[rebel11]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this doesn't kick in until 2012.

[stalin's dead]

I want to know when do all these changes come into effect?

 

ESA - time limit

Housing Benefit changes

Council Benefit changes

 

thanks

[wishface]

Thanks for the clarification.

[emmaf01]

There doesn't seem to be any definitive answer as to WHEN any of these changes will occur.

 

Personally I hear the postman at the door each day and expect the worst. But then after the mention of "hit squads" being sent into neighbourhoods to "tackle benefit fraud" over the weekend, I asked my husband how soon it was before we would have to find some kind soul to hide us in their attic while the Gestapo searched the area.

 

Everything is still up in the air as far as dates. They want us to sit and wait quietly until they decide to inform us.

[mikejgk]

I gather that when it does come in, those who have already been on ESA for over a year will lose it immediately if they do not pass the means test.

[3333333]

When it says assetts, does this mean equity in your house?

[rebel11]

In the article it mention 2012 for ESA.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1322373/SPENDING-REVIEW-2010-Find-job-lose-sickness-benefit.html

[speedfreek]

In the article it mention 2012 for ESA.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1322373/SPENDING-REVIEW-2010-Find-job-lose-sickness-benefit.html

 

Same writer James Chapman has put this on here http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=516900&in_page_id=2&expand=true#StartComments

 

I am still fuming from seeing this!

[reallymadwoman]

There's no point fuming - it's basically what the general public are being conditioned to think. If you say 'benefit' and 'scrounger' in the same sentence often enough, they come to mean exactly the same thing.

[wishface]

Idiots that believe printing vouchers is the answer don't realise it's going to be more expensive than just paying the claimant the value in money instead.

[rachmac83]

Giving us vouchers would be very demeaning, can you imagine going to the supermarket and paying with them it would be like announcing to the world yes i am on benefits. i think id feel like i constantly would have to explain myself to stop people automatically thinking there goes another scrounger.

 

aren't we entitled to some dignity and what about confidentiality i don't wont the world to know im on benefits.

 

honestly these people have no idea, i posted a cross reply on there cos it made me mad as well.

[emmaf01]

If they pay us vouchers, how will we pay for utilities or transport? It seems totally mad. And I don't tell anyone now I'm on benefits. Even relatives talk about scroungers and then adding "of course we don't mean you" doesn't make it any better.

[Gemstar]

Hello

I have been reading this with a great deal of interest. I agree absolutely that any contribution based benefit should have a time limit attached to it.

 

Otherwise you are going to have millionaires claiming ESA for year after year because they paid some contributions in the past.

 

I think that ALL benefits should be means tested and the contribution based ones should be scrapped.

 

I would suggest that this includes everything - JSA, ESA, Bus passes, Winter Fuel Allowance, DLA, AA, Familly Allowance etc etc.

 

If people have enough coming in then why should the state give them any more!

 

I have someone in my family who retired from the Civil Service about 25 years ago. He actually lives quite well on that pension without the rest that he gets. He has never spent a penny of his Old Age Pension - he invests it in bank and building society bonds. He also gets another £71.40 every week Attendance Allowance which he uses to pay his gardener and handyman, £400 heating allowance, bus pass - yet still runs a car, but choses not to use it because it is difficult to park sometimes, free TV licence, a war pension etc etc.

Surely that is a good enough reason to means test everything?

 

Gemma

[rachmac83]

Gemstar

 

As i have said before means testing is fine if they increase the amount income allowed. Can you please answer me this honestly.

 

If God Forbid you and yours were in some kind of accident that left you disabled could you manage on £102.00pw?

 

I don't think you understand DLA at all i think that using it to pay for a Gardner and handyman is a good use, he's using it to pay for things he can longer do himself that he would of been able if he was not disabled. A lot of us don't have that luxury we have no choice but use it just to survive. And yes you are allowed to use it as the claimant see fit.

 

I have to say i don't know much about war pensions but i absolutely disagree that they should means tested. Many war veterans has their youth stolen and their lives destroyed if they didn't loose them. We as a population and especially as a government owe them our absolute respect and gratitude. They deserve to enjoy their retirement.

 

In theory you do make a good point but in reality the way system works just doesn't allow for this, it needs a complete overhaul first .

[rebel11]

'Giving us vouchers would be very demeaning, can you imagine going to the supermarket'

 

You could argue that, that would breach your 'Human Rights', it's designed to humiliate. They would in effect be creating a different class of citizen.

 

The supermaket have enough problem with 'Vouchers', every been in a queue, someone presents a 5p off voucher, the voucher is taken away for forensic inspection, they return 20 minutes later saying it can't be used.

[debt4get]

all that would happen would be a black market in vouchers, people would be selling them for less than face value for cash, or they would very quickly be reproduced by some unscrupulous individuals and you would be able to buy them..or perhaps the condemnations would like to put forward a voucher that has the persons identity etc printed on it...imagine the cost???

[Gemstar]

Hello

 

Thanks for your comments. Yes I was trying to make a point of saying that there are people out there that don't need any benefit at all. They have their own resources. It is criminal that this individual can 'invest the whole of his OAP for over 20 years. that total without interest would amount to some £90,000 so far!!

 

That on top of his AA and War Pension (incidentally he suffered PTSD - something that happens today to 'ordinary' people and they get on with their life).

 

Of course there are those that every £1 matters, but think of the increase they could have if all benefits and pensions were means tested?

 

£102 pw? Yes I could live on that a week. In fact currently the minimum that somebody would get at 60 + is £132.60 pw, not £102.

No rent, Council Tax etc - just food heat, light and general living costs - £132 pw - yes certainly - I happen to do so!.

 

Gemma

x