× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

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

Supported Permitted Work during a Mandatory Reconsideration period

BC Welfare Rights
forum member

The Brunswick Centre, Kirklees & Calderdale

Send message

Total Posts: 1366

Joined: 22 July 2013

Anyone any thoughts on this?

Client was doing SPW at the higher limit whilst receiving IR ESA, failed LCWA and asked for a Mandy (MR), signed on JSA whilst awaiting Mandy’s reply. JSA was paid (minus her wage after usual diregard) during the Mandy period. This has meant about £2.50 p/w JSA.

Mandy has now spoken and upheld the original LCW decision. Client has successfully lodged appeal and will shortly sign off JSA and return to ESA assessment rate pending Tribunal.

When she gets her backdated ESA minus JSA paid for the Mandy period, should she get the full assessment rate of ESA without the wage deductions that were made from JSA? i.e. should she get paid ESA at £72.40 p/w minus £2.50ish? Or does the fact that she was claiming JSA mean that she could not do SPW, therefore no ESA backdate?

My feeling is that she should get to keep her wage/ESA due to natural justice if nothing else but I am unsure what or where the regulations for this are.

There is a second related issue that I haven’t quite got my head around yet that may complicate things a bit but if anyone has any ideas on the above I would be most grateful.

BC Welfare Rights
forum member

The Brunswick Centre, Kirklees & Calderdale

Send message

Total Posts: 1366

Joined: 22 July 2013

Tony Bowman - 12 May 2014 09:36 AM

I can’t think of any reason why SPW wouldn’t continue to be accepted as normal.

The DWP seems to have thought up a reason though…
Don’t know full facts yet but basically it has told client that rather than reinstating ESA for MR period it is paying ESA as a new claim from the date that JSA claim ended and it is just ignoring the MR period in terms of the previous ESA claim. Obviously I will look to challenge this when in possession of full facts but can anyone think of any reason why the DM might be right to do this?