Forum Home → Discussion → Income support, JSA and tax credits → Thread
GPoW Assessment for EEA nationals asserting a right to reside other than jobseekers/retained workers
Related story, slightly different angle:
I heard yesterday of a claimant awarded Income Support in accordance with the Elmi principle (registered as jobseeker while not claiming JSA). DWP had notes on CIS that she was a “jobseeker”, which for that limited purpose was a perfectly correct thing to do.
Unfortunately the local authority saw the note and concluded that the claimant was not entitled to HB because she was a “jobseeker”. This was a mistake for two reasons:
- if the claimant is on IS, HB Reg 10(3B) “trumps” Reg 10(3A) which means the claimant cannot be a PFA for HB purposes
- clearly the claimant retains worker status (as DWP knew).
This highlights the confusion that can be caused by the multiple overlapping meanings of the word “jobseeker”, which is why I am pursuing my one-man campaign to persuade everyone to say “work seeker” when referring specifially to the EEA right of residence enjoyed by a person entering the job market who has not yet found a job - some unique label that will make it clear the person has that particular economic status.
Assuming no perm res or family member rights etc. No eea national can retain worker status for longer than 6 months can they now? Unless compelling evidence ie a start date. Even if they have worked over 12 months.
We have a tenant who moved from Poland with his parents in 2005, he is now 20yrs old, and since leaving full time education has been in work. Left a job in September to move to a new area and seeking work. Has not claimed JSA but tried to claim HB and has been refused. He is currently doing voluntary work and using up a small amount of savings. We are in the process of seeking a full explanation of why he has been refused HB and have advised him to claim JSA., which may be difficult in view of the fact he gave up employment.
His parents still reside in the UK. Your views on his entitlement and any issues he may come across are appreciated.
If he’s under 21 he’ll have a RTR via his parents won’t he? (on the presumption they’re workers, etc).
That’s my view, but what happens when he turns 21 in July? Will his right continue if established before his 21st birthday?
If he can show a continuous period of five years in which his parents had a right to reside and/or he was working himself, he will have a permanent right of residence now. It seems he will need to rely on his parents’ status for a fair portion of the five years so some evidence of their status is required.
The reason for the Council’s HB decision at this stage may be that they are not satisfied he has remained in the job market as a worker with retained status - in particular he does not seem to be registered with DWP yet. When he does claim JSA his status will inevitably be recorded by DWP as “jobseeker” (even if he gets over the voluntary unemployment hurdle), and equally inevitably the Council will probably follow that in the first instance and refuse HB again. So if the permanent R2R option doesn’t work, the next task would be to persuade the Council that the claimant never lost touch with the job market before he completed the formality of registering with DWP. The I(EEA) Regs require him to seek work immediately after his job ended, but registration with DWP does not necessarily have to be immediate (caters for people who delay signing on because they hoped they were going to find another job sraightaway).
I would think permanent R2R is the more promising option
Hi all
I have Polish single parent came to UK in 2005, lived here continuously, worked from Oct 2005 to August 2009 - has two children, one is disabled and receives DLA - she gets CA and CTC
HB has been refused and IS now refused - currently waiting for reconsideration on the IS
all hints and tips are welcome please
Did she work legally under A8 rules; was at least one child in the UK at that time; and is that same child now in school?
Did she work legally under A8 rules; was at least one child in the UK at that time; and is that same child now in school?
Hi - she worked for Adil Catering Lid (thinkthey are burger king) have got confirmation of her employment from them for whole period - her first child was born in 2008 the second in 2011 - he is in full time education at special needs school
Looks promising then. As long as she had an A8 certificate (and you would think burger king would have that covered), she has a derived right to reside as primary carer of the older child and is exempt from signing on as carer of the younger child. All hangs on the A8 certificate and whether DWP is satisfied she had one.
Hi, if EEA national has been in the UK for over 5 years and acquired permanent right to reside, can they claim IS?
I have seen many cases where JCP advised EEA nationals to claim IS where they were not entitled to it.
The EEA nationals didn’t know that they are not entitled and made a claim for IS (from JSA). Obviously didn’t get IS and their HB stopped. Can they do something about that?
thank you
Hi, if EEA national has been in the UK for over 5 years and acquired permanent right to reside, can they claim IS?
I have seen many cases where JCP advised EEA nationals to claim IS where they were not entitled to it.
The EEA nationals didn’t know that they are not entitled and made a claim for IS (from JSA). Obviously didn’t get IS and their HB stopped. Can they do something about that?thank you
If they actually have a permanent right to reside, then they must not be discriminated against on the grounds of their nationality even if they are not economically active. In other words, yes, they can claim IS assuming they meet the usual criteria.
The problem your clients might be facing is that they do not actually have the permanent right to reside. You have to have been residing in the UK ‘lawfully’, which means in accordance with specific provisions of EU law. Examples include by being a worker, self-employed, self-sufficient with comprehensive sickness insurance, a jobseeker, retained worker status and so on for five years (or sometimes shorter if special provisions apply). It does not include all EU rights to reside, however, such as Teixeira/Ibrahim nationals.
If your clients have been wrongly advised by JCP, then you should at least consider a complaint and ask for compensation.
Hi, if EEA national has been in the UK for over 5 years and acquired permanent right to reside, can they claim IS?
I have seen many cases where JCP advised EEA nationals to claim IS where they were not entitled to it.
The EEA nationals didn’t know that they are not entitled and made a claim for IS (from JSA). Obviously didn’t get IS and their HB stopped. Can they do something about that?thank you
If they actually have a permanent right to reside, then they must not be discriminated against on the grounds of their nationality even if they are not economically active. In other words, yes, they can claim IS assuming they meet the usual criteria.
The problem your clients might be facing is that they do not actually have the permanent right to reside. You have to have been residing in the UK ‘lawfully’, which means in accordance with specific provisions of EU law. Examples include by being a worker, self-employed, self-sufficient with comprehensive sickness insurance, a jobseeker, retained worker status and so on for five years (or sometimes shorter if special provisions apply). It does not include all EU rights to reside, however, such as Teixeira/Ibrahim nationals.
If your clients have been wrongly advised by JCP, then you should at least consider a complaint and ask for compensation.
Hi, thank you for the fast reply.
If they have a blue card from Home Office that says they have a permanent right to reside, then they can claim IS, is that correct?
Or if they have worked for 5 years or claimed JSA (for 5 years??) then they would have permanent right to reside?
I guess it’s probably best to advise people who have been here for 5 years and worked to apply for a permanent right to reside, and that way they should have no problem?
If they have a card from Home Office that says permanent right to reside, then does that mean they will be always classed as having permanent right to reside and be exempt from doing the right to reside test? Or can they lose their permanent right to reside while they are still in the UK?
thanks
Under the Directive, all residence documents are purely declarative. The rights come directly from EU law and not from the residence cards. You don’t need to apply for the permanent right to reside - you get it automatically.
You can lose the permentent RTR if you are absent from the UK for two consecutive years. Therefore, even if you have a perm residence card you can still lose the permanent right to reside if you leave the UK for that amount of time. Similarly, if you are a worker without a permanent RTR, you are given a residence card and you then lose your RTR, your residence card no longer reflects reality. The DWP can therefore scrutinise whether or not you really have a RTR despite what your card says.
However, if your client has a perm res card and has not left the UK, then that should at least help you identify the client’s RTR. The Home Office will have done the necessary checks and so it should really be taken at face value. I’m not sure what the DWP’s policy is on accepting HO residence cards as evidence of a RTR. I can’t find anything explicitly on it in the Decision Makers Guide except for one reference to derivative residence card, where they say they will not take it at face value.
I actually come across very few clients with residence cards and it’s usually non-EEA family members who want them. But a perm res card cannot harm if they can afford the £55 fee.
Hi, I am new to this site and I have been supporting EEA nationals for nearly 5 years with almost no training so I am here to ask questions to understand the rules a bit more and to be able to advise clients more effectively.
Could someone please explain to me the rules when EEA national would have a right to reside to claim JSA?
I had one client who has permanent right to reside and was asked to provide compelling evidence that she has a GPoW.
Her claim was then stopped but 2 weeks later she got a letter that she does not need to provide GPoW evidence as she has a right to reside because her son is at school. I have never seen this before, so could someone please explain to me when does EEA national have a right to reside so they don’t need to provide compelling evidence that they have GPoW?
thank you