Either I've been a sleep for too long or totally missed something. Either way I dont have many dealings with MIP disputes and not come across this one before.

Help with MIP with JSA - ok the waiting period and rate of interest has changed but I dont remember any change to not paying MIP when there is a mortage protection policy in payment.

Client receives 450.00 p/mth from the policy, - monthly mortgage payment is 483.43 - JSA have decided to make MIP payments of 29.41 p/wk (after NDD of 47.75)
They have also decided that she has income from the policy of 50.43 as the policy payment is paid direct into her bank account.

This decision has meant she receives the princely sum of 13.87 p/wk to live on. Not forgetting she did not ask for help with MIP, but was told by JC+ advisor that she had to provide these details after the 13 wk waiting period when she changed from CB JSA to IB JSA - They also insist that she has to receive these payments and does not have to request help with MIP in order to receive MIP.

Now not being an expert on DWP logic, but this does not make sense - I have spoken to a DM at the MIP section who insist they are right ! !
However they cannot give me the regs they have used.

I cannot find any refference in CPAG on this. Am aware of the possible excess income, rule when payments made to clients bank account ( in this case they are wrong) but making MIP payments when this is covered by protection policy ?

Assuming they are right - then this makes the client worse off and goes against the principles behind the benefit she is claiming.

If they are wrong - then this mistake must have been repeated across the Stockton area.

Has anyone come across anything like this before ?



Its time I took up gardening, at least I know where the plant pots are stored

Sorry if I missed anything in your post, but is the payment made to the client, or directly to the mortgage lender?

Brian

Yes payment is direct to her bank account.

out of the 450 paid into the account they deduct payments for capital and any premiums on the policy and building insurance - they only deduct interest that is Not, being met by the DWP - That is fine and I understand that - but this leaves her with 50.43 counted as income so therefore only 13.87 JSA is payable.

The problem is that she is worse of than before the DWP insisted on paying SMI when she did not claim it or need it.

An urgent appeal was submitted yesterday - now I cannot even get a call back (as there too busy, or not answering my calls) or talk to a DM with any sense.

SMI is there to help those who cannot meet the mortgage costs - my client was - but now she cannot feed herself - yet the DWP cannot see it, aparantly they told her insurance company, its her problem as she took out the protection policy !

All a bit complicated for me on the Friday afternoon before I go on holiday, but do paras 28232 et seq of the Decision Makers' Gide help?

Oh well, could'nt speak to DM but they did relay a message via BDC to me whilst on hold - the case gone to appeal section which as we know takes 3 months, so they wont do anything till it comes back ! - 3 months living on 13.00 a week !

SMI and bankers eh

Have requested call from the manager Monday first thing - all they have to do is stop the SMI and pay her app amount of 64.30 a week, unless this is forced payments to ensure more poverty.

I did ask though what IQ score does it take to work in SMI section,
Answer came back "will check with JSA jobs section" I said no IQ score not B&Q store MFI section !
Well it is friday

The one vital thing you haven't mentioned is the capital outstanding on the mortgage.

Oops The capital is paid by the mortgage protection policy - the issues are :- But not nessessary in this order,

1. Should the DWP pay SMI when the claimant did not apply for it and can they prevent her from not receiving it !.
2. The fact that the DWP are paying the SMI means the claimant is worse off. Not the principles of the policy beihind it.
3. The Mortgage Protection Policy is paying all but 33.00 p/month - so no help is needed or wanted.
4. The reason for the 50.43 assessed income on her JSA, as a result of the protection Policy being paid into her account is due to the fact the DWP are paying the SMI less a Non Dependant Deduction - so all of the interst paid by the Mortage Protection Policy is not deducted from the payments received. There is and cannot be any excess income, this is only created by the DWP paying SMI.

Maybe I'm stressed by this one and lost the plot, but I cannot see it being a problem for the DWP and why my client is expected to live off 13.00 p/wk becuase she has a mortgage protection policy in place. She cannot have any control whatsoever of the protection policy payments.

The affect of the DWP decision means that the NDD applied on her Mortrgage costs, in their calculation, is being transfered to her JSA (IB) entitlement.

No governement legislation can insist or demand that because of this they have to live on peanuts - in effect they are saying that her son should subsidise her JSA entitlement.

In short - She has no need for SMI but they are insisting it is paid and this results in her having only 13.00 p/wk JSA entitlement - and to make it worse they insist in goes through the appeals process taking over 3 momths.

Her policy IS paying her mortgage - so the DWP decision means her son has to pay towads her JSA !

I'm not a rocketeer but its not Roc ....... ! Just cant get the JSA SMI section or any DM to understand, even with an urgent complaint

And forget call backs, the standard at DWP BDC and DM's has fallen drastically over the last 2 - 3 weeks.

I need a drink

Col

After reading all of that I need a drink myself
What about the MP can she seek some help there, lots of times they are very helpful and understanding something which you will never get with DWP.

Good Luck

If you look at the disregards schedule you will see that MPI payments are disregarded income only to the extent that:
they cover any amount of interest not payable by the SMI scheme, plus any element of capital repayment, plus payments on any endowment policy. The rest is treated as notional income. There is no disregard for any amount payable under the SMI scheme, so if the Dept was not paying that she would have no JSA entitelment at all, as that would be treated all as income. By paying SMI they are ensuring that at least she gets some JSA (and thus gets her CTB in full).

If they have got the calculations wrong that is another thing.

The interplay of the notional income rules and the disregards is quite complicated but I think at the end of the day clear. Any money paid to her wihich is used for purposes covered by the SMI scheme is notional income, unless she actually claims SMI.

For the technically minded with access to the regs the relevant regultaion on notional income is 105(10)(a)(ii). Sch 7 para 30 deals with the relevant disregard.

Thanks for that - JSA(IB) was in payment in full during the waiting period from July to Sept - the MPI was not counted as notional income unitl the SMI was put in place.

The capital outstanding figure is needed to calculate the correct SMI figure.