Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Work capability issues and ESA  →  Thread

ESA – migration cases – inaccurate IRESA assessments?

‹ First  < 26 27 28 29 > 

 

Brian JB
forum member

Advisor, Wirral Welfare Rights Unit, Birkenhead

Send message

Total Posts: 405

Joined: 18 June 2010

No, it shouldn’t be, because you do not have to make a claim for ESA(IR) if you are already receiving ESA (CB) - the ESA3 is a review form, so you are asking for a supersession or revision of the existing decision awarding ESA(CB) (as appropriate). I think the information on that web page is incorrect

     
unhindered by talent
forum member

Welfare Rights Team, Aberdeenshire Council

Send message

Total Posts: 172

Joined: 18 October 2013

Many thanks, Brian. That’s what I thought until I saw that site

     
Jo_Smith
forum member

Citizens Advice Hillingdon

Send message

Total Posts: 7

Joined: 3 October 2018

I am referring to my recent post about client who missed out on ESA / IBR backdate due to being means tested out *on the date* of migration.

Client later had various interactions with DWP, like review, interview under caution (NFA, client was subject to malicious report) and other communications with DWP where her circumstances could have been reviewed but were not. At one point she wrote to DWP saying “I am no longer a student, what shall I do now in order to continue to claim ESA”. She received no response and continued to be paid (C) ESA only.

I was just wondering whether in your opinion an any time revision would be appropriate, OR supersession?

There was really no decision to be revised, besides the original decision to award (C) ESA, without assessing her for (IB) ESA. However, revising this decision wouldn’t be fruitful as she was in fact not entitled to (IB) ESA on that date.

Not sure how to tackle it. I think also there might be quite a few clients who had this type of scenario happening to them.  As Helen says, this perpetuates the underpayment of income-based ESA.

     
Jo_Smith
forum member

Citizens Advice Hillingdon

Send message

Total Posts: 7

Joined: 3 October 2018

I think I found my own answer :D

“If the financial conditions are satisfied from a later date, the normal supersession rules apply. See DMG Chapter 04 for further details”

DWP guidance in DMG Memo 11/18, para 11 &14;
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/738964/m-11-18.pdf

      [ Edited: 4 Oct 2018 at 03:22 pm by Jo_Smith ]
stevenmcavoy
forum member

WRO, campaigns and policy, Enable Scotland

Send message

Total Posts: 729

Joined: 22 August 2013

i have a real classic here.

this is a case that went to tribunal and we lost. i challenged it and we have got to the stage of UT where it has been sisted pending the outcome of the other cases.

a direction notice was sent to the dwp asking for comment following the recent outcomes.

rather than pay out as per the ministerial statement they have asked for the time limit to respond to the direction notice to be extended (and got it).

i have now had this case for about two years.

     
unhindered by talent
forum member

Welfare Rights Team, Aberdeenshire Council

Send message

Total Posts: 172

Joined: 18 October 2013

Does anyone have the address to send ESA3’s for these cases to?

     
Jo_Smith
forum member

Citizens Advice Hillingdon

Send message

Total Posts: 7

Joined: 3 October 2018

stevenmcavoy - 09 October 2018 04:40 PM

i have a real classic here.

this is a case that went to tribunal and we lost. i challenged it and we have got to the stage of UT where it has been sisted pending the outcome of the other cases.

a direction notice was sent to the dwp asking for comment following the recent outcomes.

rather than pay out as per the ministerial statement they have asked for the time limit to respond to the direction notice to be extended (and got it).

i have now had this case for about two years.

Steven, was it about the whole “ESA is one benefit” issue or was it about the pre October 2014 backdating?
I suspect is the former, as you’ve had it for 2 years. And there is me, getting hysterical about case which is 7 months old LOL!

 

      [ Edited: 11 Oct 2018 at 12:35 pm by Jo_Smith ]
stevenmcavoy
forum member

WRO, campaigns and policy, Enable Scotland

Send message

Total Posts: 729

Joined: 22 August 2013

Jo_Smith - 11 October 2018 12:21 PM
stevenmcavoy - 09 October 2018 04:40 PM

i have a real classic here.

this is a case that went to tribunal and we lost. i challenged it and we have got to the stage of UT where it has been sisted pending the outcome of the other cases.

a direction notice was sent to the dwp asking for comment following the recent outcomes.

rather than pay out as per the ministerial statement they have asked for the time limit to respond to the direction notice to be extended (and got it).

i have now had this case for about two years.

Steven, was it about the whole “ESA is one benefit” issue or was it about the pre October 2014 backdating?
I suspect is the former, as you’ve had it for 2 years. And there is me, getting hysterical about case which is 7 months old LOL!

this one was refused in total and for some reason the tribunal agreed with that stance.

so…i noticed ir part missing..sone esa3…they added it and done the basic backdate of (cant mind if it was 1 or 3 months.)...refused to backdate any further at all..went through all the usual steps and got to ut and then case sisted.

its partly dragged in two years due to the ut process but also just poor administration.

     
Owen_Stevens
forum member

UC London Adviser, CPAG

Send message

Total Posts: 11

Joined: 1 October 2018

I’ve just been re-reading Peter Schofield’s evidence to the PAC in light of the recent news that DWP had drastically underestimated the number of people affected by this issue: https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/welfare-rights/news/item/dwp-expects-to-pay-970-million-in-esa-underpayments-to-around-180000-claima 

At the time, Peter Schofield agreed that he was “absolutely bullet-proof convinced” and “confident” that DWP have collected in their data everybody who was affected by the IB/cESA failure:

Q86         Anne Marie Morris: But you are not going to do that tomorrow, are you?
Peter Schofield: I am doing it at the moment. I am doing it every day. Day by day, we are paying more people. We have now recruited the full team, but we have been paying since August 2017.
Q87         Anne Marie Morris: How long will it take you to pay everyone?
Peter Schofield: By April.
Q88         Anne Marie Morris: And are you absolutely bullet-proof convinced that you have collected in your data everybody who was affected?
Peter Schofield: Yes. Emma could talk you through the whole process, if you like.
Q89         Anne Marie Morris: I don’t want the whole process; I just want to know whether you are confident.
Peter Schofield: Yes, I am. I have sat with one of the teams as they have made an outgoing phone call to someone affected just to hear myself what the process is. It is very thorough. Even in what actually turned out to be a relatively straightforward case, the phone call itself took half an hour. We went through very thoroughly a whole host of pieces of information about income

     
Dan Manville
forum member

Mental health, Wolverhampton CC Welfare Rights

Send message

Total Posts: 1972

Joined: 15 October 2012

Owen_Stevens - 18 October 2018 11:09 AM

I’ve just been re-reading Peter Schofield’s evidence to the PAC in light of the recent news that DWP had drastically underestimated the number of people affected by this issue: https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/welfare-rights/news/item/dwp-expects-to-pay-970-million-in-esa-underpayments-to-around-180000-claima 

At the time, Peter Schofield agreed that he was “absolutely bullet-proof convinced” and “confident” that DWP have collected in their data everybody who was affected by the IB/cESA failure:

I thought this was limited to people that converted from 2014; maybe I’ve been labouring under the misapprehension that those additional claimants; pre 2014, were the additional caseload.

That aside, was I the only person who heard Daphne’s star turn this morning?

     
Andyp5 Citizens Advice Bridport & District
forum member

Citizens Advice Bridport & District

Send message

Total Posts: 290

Joined: 9 January 2017

Dan Manville - 18 October 2018 12:57 PM
Owen_Stevens - 18 October 2018 11:09 AM

I’ve just been re-reading Peter Schofield’s evidence to the PAC in light of the recent news that DWP had drastically underestimated the number of people affected by this issue: https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/welfare-rights/news/item/dwp-expects-to-pay-970-million-in-esa-underpayments-to-around-180000-claima 

At the time, Peter Schofield agreed that he was “absolutely bullet-proof convinced” and “confident” that DWP have collected in their data everybody who was affected by the IB/cESA failure:

I thought this was limited to people that converted from 2014; maybe I’ve been labouring under the misapprehension that those additional claimants; pre 2014, were the additional caseload.

That aside, was I the only person who heard Daphne’s star turn this morning?

I heard ‘Daphne’s star turn’ was going to email her to say she did great! But i’ll say it here! You wuz great Daphne!

     
Owen_Stevens
forum member

UC London Adviser, CPAG

Send message

Total Posts: 11

Joined: 1 October 2018

Dan Manville - 18 October 2018 12:57 PM

I thought this was limited to people that converted from 2014; maybe I’ve been labouring under the misapprehension that those additional claimants; pre 2014, were the additional caseload.

I think you might be right Dan looking at para 13 here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/748944/esa-underpayments-forecast-number-affected-expenditure-and-progress-on-checking.pdf

 

     
Daphne
Administrator

rightsnet writer / editor

Send message

Total Posts: 1985

Joined: 14 March 2014

I think the initial trawl was people who migrated between 1/1/11 and 31/12/14 who had claims still in payment after October 2014 as they would only pay from that date.

The additional trawl is people migrating over the same period but who no longer had a claim in payment by October 2014 as, under the DWP’s original stance, they wouldn’t have got any money.

That’s my understanding anyway…

And thanks for the comments - I found it a bit nerve-racking…

     
Jo_Smith
forum member

Citizens Advice Hillingdon

Send message

Total Posts: 7

Joined: 3 October 2018

You were also on midnight news last night Daphne,  good radio voice ;D

On an different note, I am deeply unhappy that IBR team only looks at a migration date.  They ask for a lot of evidence and have ability to see whether circumstances changed at a later date. I understand that normally we would expect claimants to notify the DWP of any c.o.c’s but claimants who were either told or who read up themselves, knew that C ESA was not affected by income, such claimants would not make it their priority to keep DWP informed.

The DMG Memo 11/18 says, in para 10: “Where the information indicates that the claimant satisfied the financial conditions from and including the effective date of the conversion decision, that decision should be revised for official error, and arrears of ESA(IR) paid accordingly.”

It does not say “on effective date” but “from and including the effective date”

The effect is further delays for claimants who receive negative decision and (if they know how to or are lucky to have an adviser) have to then submit further requests to DWP,  i.e. supersession, but again, only if they can show that they have informed DWP of c.o.c or DWP should have asked.

Example: client means tested out of IR ESA on the date of migration. Refused backdate by DWP.  However client’s circumstances change dramatically just few months later that conversion date. That was 3 years ago. So client lost out on 3 years of SDP & EDP.

Practical advice: when submitting supersession request,  submit to the “normal” ESA office, not the IBR office. I received a call from the IBR decision maker who said they only deal with “on the day of migration” decisions.

      [ Edited: 19 Oct 2018 at 01:28 pm by Jo_Smith ]
Andrew Dutton
forum member

Derbyshire Welfare Rights Service

Send message

Total Posts: 1235

Joined: 12 October 2012

https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/welfare-rights/news/item/responsibility-for-compensating-for-loss-of-passported-benefits-due-to-esa

This news about passported benefits is utterly, drearily depressing.

From reading the transcript of the Parliamentary debate, I can only glean the ‘facts’ that the DWP is wonderful really, the minister is a lovely person, and the Opposition is horrid-poo and asks nasty questions because it likes being nasty.

As for any hope of proper progress for people who have lost passported benefits as well as huge sums of ESA…..? Head in hands…...