ESA answers in context of 16-hour working week?

Hello,

I'm trying to fill in the ESA50 at the moment. I've read some guidance that suggests filling in the form thinking about your ability to perform these tasks in the context of a 16 hour or more working week, which obviously contains activity such as travelling to and from work and getting breakfast that are on top of the work itself. Is this right? In my case, this context would dramatically effect my answers. As this is not mentioned in the form, I'm hesitant to write this way and then have what I am able to do now, given that I am not working, used to contradict my answers on the form.

Given that what I am 'normally' able to do depends so much on how much and what sort of activity I've been doing generally (along with lots of other factors), I'm finding it incredibly difficult to answer lots of these ESA50 questions. I can explain all the things that mean that my condition will vary according to lots of factors, but they still somehow want me to come up with an answer. I hate this form.

Thanks.

Hi gateway. I will leave one of the more knowledgeable mod's to answer your question.

May I request that you keep your questions to one thread, please? That makes it easier for us to understand your situation and avoid repeating ourselves!

Gateway wrote:

Hello,

I'm trying to fill in the ESA50 at the moment. I've read some guidance that suggests filling in the form thinking about your ability to perform these tasks in the context of a 16 hour or more working week, which obviously contains activity such as travelling to and from work and getting breakfast that are on top of the work itself. Is this right? In my case, this context would dramatically effect my answers. As this is not mentioned in the form, I'm hesitant to write this way and then have what I am able to do now, given that I am not working, used to contradict my answers on the form.

Given that what I am 'normally' able to do depends so much on how much and what sort of activity I've been doing generally (along with lots of other factors), I'm finding it incredibly difficult to answer lots of these ESA50 questions. I can explain all the things that mean that my condition will vary according to lots of factors, but they still somehow want me to come up with an answer. I hate this form.

Thanks.

Hi,

Without seeing this 'guidance' you have seen and in what context it is relating to, it is pretty much impossible to answer your query.

In anycase, as each person/claim is different, one persons disabilities/limitations will be different to the next persons, so again it would be impossible to place a narrow context on such activity.

As we cannot give specific advice as we do not have access to case papers etc, and bearing in mind the number of and type of queries you are asking, it maybe wise for you to seek some face to face advice from such as a welfare rights organisation/CAB etc who can go through your own claim in depth and give you specific advice.

Pete

Thanks, Pete, sorry if my post was unclear. The guidance to filling in the ESA50 to which I was referring is from a medical charity. After talking about fluctuating symptoms, it says

“You should think about your ability to consistently perform the tasks effectively over a 16-hour or more working week and for the coming weeks and months following. Bear in mind that a 16-hour working week also requires using an “unseen” amount of energy, eg you need time to dress, get breakfast, and travel to and from work. This all has to be done to a timescale and a deadline but is often an “unseen” expenditure of energy”.

So, for example, my ability to walk 50m repeatedly depends on what else I’ve been spending my energy on. If I’d been working as described above, I’d obviously be able to do much less than if I hadn’t been working. The same rule applies for most of the questions on the form. So I don’t know whether to answer the questions of what I’d normally be able to do given a 16 hour or more working week, or given my situation now where I do 0 hours of work. Not sure if that makes sense!

Thanks, Mrs Hurtyback, sorry to post inconveniently, I thought I’d split my posts as I had several different questions.

Thanks very much

Thanks, very much for your reply, Gordon. Basically as it says in the Benefits and Work guidance, the form and the way it's marked just isn't fit for purpose, I'll just do my best.