× Members

CB 365 day for life?

More
12 years 5 months ago #73759 by Gordon
Replied by Gordon on topic Re:CB 365 day for life?
RachelPotter wrote:

However, with regard to your quesion, yes, he did state that there are circumstances where a claimant who has already spent 365 days in the WRAG, who was not eligible for ESA(IR) due to the means test, would still be unable to claim ESA(CB), even if they now qualified for the Support Group.


Surely this means they could be in the Support group but not be paid?

Best wishes,
Rachel

Meeting the techincal requirements for the Support Group is not the same as being in the Support Group.

To be in the Support Group you have to be entitled to ESA, if you are not entitled to ESA you cannot be in the Support Group.

The time limit stops entitlement to ESA(CB), if a claimant does not satisfy the requirements for ESA(IR) also, then they lose all entitlement to ESA, with the exception of NI Credits.

Gordon

Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 5 months ago #73760 by Crazydiamond
Replied by Crazydiamond on topic Re:CB 365 day for life?
And all this nonsense to the detriment of ESA claimants is to pay the £2 billion bill for the introduction of Universal Credit! :angry: :angry:

Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • RachelPotter
12 years 5 months ago #73763 by RachelPotter
Replied by RachelPotter on topic Re:CB 365 day for life?
Gordon, thankyou for your wonderful patience, I really do appreciate it! :)

(thought I may get 'shouted at!')

I have just trawled through most of the transcript.

The amendment to extend CB ESA to 2 years was withdrawn :angry:

Thanks again Gordon, you're lovely!

Rachel

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • RachelPotter
12 years 5 months ago #73765 by RachelPotter
Replied by RachelPotter on topic Re:CB 365 day for life?
Sorry to test everybodies patience further but on closer inspection, the transcript states;

Clause 51, as amended, agreed.

I think that is bad news?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 5 months ago #73766 by Feelinghopeless
Replied by Feelinghopeless on topic Re:CB 365 day for life?
RachelPotter wrote:

Sorry to test everybodies patience further but on closer inspection, the transcript states;

Clause 51, as amended, agreed.

I think that is bad news?


How was it amended?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 5 months ago #73767 by Gordon
Replied by Gordon on topic Re:CB 365 day for life?
Rachel

The only amendment I specifically heard to be withdrawn was a badly worded one that aimed to change the means test for ESA(IR), which frankly was never going to fly anyway.

I'm less sure as to what was agreed or "not moved", although, there did appear to be several amendments which were agreed.

However, all of this has to taken to a vote in the H of L, which the Government have a majoriy in, so I still think it unlikely that it will be passed with these amendments.

If this is the case, I would assume that the bill will then be re-presented in its original form (i.e. without amendment), and will them likely be passed.

Gordon

Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: GordonGaryBISCatherineWendyKellygreekqueenpeterKatherineSuper UserjimmckChris
We use cookies

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential for the operation of the site, while others help us to improve this site and the user experience (tracking cookies). You can decide for yourself whether you want to allow cookies or not. Please note that if you reject them, you may not be able to use all the functionalities of the site.