- Posts: 51284
× Members
CB 365 day for life?
- Gordon
- Offline
Less More
13 years 9 months ago #73759 by Gordon
Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems
Replied by Gordon on topic Re:CB 365 day for life?
RachelPotter wrote:
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
Meeting the techincal requirements for the Support Group is not the same as being in the Support Group.
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
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
- Crazydiamond
- Offline
Less More
- Posts: 2022
13 years 9 months ago #73760 by Crazydiamond
Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems
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!


Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems
- RachelPotter
13 years 9 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The amendment to extend CB ESA to 2 years was withdrawn
Thanks again Gordon, you're lovely!
Rachel

(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

Thanks again Gordon, you're lovely!
Rachel
- RachelPotter
13 years 9 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?
Clause 51, as amended, agreed.
I think that is bad news?
- Melanie Tudor
- Offline
Less More
- Posts: 145
13 years 9 months ago #73766 by Melanie Tudor
Replied by Melanie Tudor on topic Re:CB 365 day for life?
RachelPotter wrote:
How was it amended?
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?
- Gordon
- Offline
Less More
- Posts: 51284
13 years 9 months ago #73767 by Gordon
Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems
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
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
Moderators: Gordon, latetrain, BIS, Catherine, Chris, David, Angel