Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Residence issues  →  Thread

Another R2R query

Pete at CAB
forum member

Childrens Centre Adviser, CAB, Camborne

Send message

Total Posts: 215

Joined: 12 December 2017

Hoping to get a bit of clarity for this case.

Cl is single person, an EU national with pre settled status. They were furloughed in April 2020 and then laid off in June. They claimed NS JSA from June but that is about to run out.

In Oct 20 they became too ill to work and claimed UC. The claim was refused as they were found not to have R2R (Hab Res was accepted).

It would appear that R2R as a jobseeker does not apply as they had already used up the 91 days allowed under the UC rules before they claimed UC.

Would a change of circs ( that they are temporarily not well enough to work) have the effect of reinstating their R2R as a EU worker that has retained their worker status even if they were reasonably fit and well when they were laid off? They have been a jobseeker and getting NS JSA since June

Any observations gratefully received

Elliot Kent
forum member

Shelter

Send message

Total Posts: 2050

Joined: 14 July 2014

The whole jobseeker/91 day thing is just a red herring which UC like to obsess about despite it not mattering.

If your client was in genuine and effective work which ceased because they became involuntarily unemployed and they registered as a jobseeker, then they can retain their right to reside as a worker for six months or potentially indefinitely following the end of that employment. The fact that nsJSA was awarded suggests that the work was genuine and effective and lasted over a year so the retention of worker status is under reg 6(2)(b) I(EEA) Regs. On the face of it, its a straightforward case given JSA is still in payment. See also KH v Bury MBC (HB) [2020] UKUT 50 (AAC) on the supposed six month limit.

Alternatively, your client can hop from retention as looking for work under reg 6(2)(b) to retention on the grounds of sickness under reg 6(2)(a). The ability to hop between heads of retention is set out in CIS/4304/2007 and HK v SSWP (ESA) [2017] UKUT 421 (AAC).

The point essentially is that your client never ceased to be a worker as defined so “reinstating” status never comes into it.

[ Edited: 10 Nov 2020 at 01:44 pm by Elliot Kent ]