FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Punished for tying to make themselves more employable.

Jump to newest
 

By *quirrel OP   Man
over a year ago

East Manchester

Just read in the local paper that a guy who had been unemployed for a year has had his unemployment payments stopped, the reason was he had borrowed money and paid to attend training courses which would have given him a better chance of getting paid work, rather than sitting around doing nothing but apply for work and claiming benefits he wanted to work to support his wife and kids so paid someone to train him so he would have more to offer.

His benefits had been stopped because by being on these trainng courses he was not able to take up work if it were offered.

After so much time I would think that the possibility of work suddenly appearing were close to zero.

The DWP position is that he wasnt actively seeking work so should lose his benefits.

Whats everyone elses opinion?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oodmessMan
over a year ago

yumsville

Odd, as the DWP (when they bother) do suggest re training

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Sounds like there's a lot more to this story than the thumbnail you picked up from the paper. Who knows?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *xodussxMan
over a year ago

sheffield

"His benefits had been stopped because by being on these trainng courses he was not able to take up work if it were offered"

How do they know that he was on the training? Has he asked for the DWP to reimburse the training fees? Or has he missed any meeting with them?

I don't think they can cut a benefit just for that

If they did, someone must be bonker in applaying the rules

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

The rules are bonkers on some of these things. Job Seekers Allowance is just that. If you are not actively seeking a job to take you off the benefit as quickly as possible then you are not entitled to it. If you have been placed on a programme (often inadequate) then they control the time you are on that programme.

If you get a job that starts in a month you can't claim JSA after the date you tell them about the job unless you are willing to continue looking for work that could start sooner as your money will stop immediately.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

did he tell them prior to doing it?

did he miss a signing on because of it?

did he turn up to sign on without a list of jobs he had applied for because of it?

bottom line is you have to apply for jobs and be available to work to receive his benefits.He seems to have fallen short on at least one of these.

Is it ridiculous? Of course it is. It's the DWP

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *xodussxMan
over a year ago

sheffield


"...If you get a job that starts in a month you can't claim JSA after the date you tell them about the job unless you are willing to continue looking for work that could start sooner as your money will stop immediately."
....

Really???? Sorry if I react like this. I know absolutely nothing about benefit

What if someone find a job that starts in a month but keep it quiet and only tell the (NO)jobcentre people just 2 days before staring or a day after? Will he get punished???

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *quirrel OP   Man
over a year ago

East Manchester

Just re-read the article, seems that his signing on day and course overlapped and he asked to sign in later the same day and when asked why he gave details of what he was doing. The person who was dealing with his claim reported it and thats why his benefit was refused.

My friend once took an on-line test to work in a job centre, she failed miserably, she said the questions asked seem to be biased in favour of passing those people who are absolute bas***ds.

Any sign of compassion or symapthy in candidates selection of possible actions to given situations is seen as a weakness and you are eliminated from progressing further to make a formal application.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound


"...If you get a job that starts in a month you can't claim JSA after the date you tell them about the job unless you are willing to continue looking for work that could start sooner as your money will stop immediately.....

Really???? Sorry if I react like this. I know absolutely nothing about benefit

What if someone find a job that starts in a month but keep it quiet and only tell the (NO)jobcentre people just 2 days before staring or a day after? Will he get punished???"

No they won't as long as they continue to show that they are actively applying for other work that could start sooner.

Unfortunately, I have met a couple of people that didn't play that game and started their new jobs with a debt just on surviving that month without any benefits and not being paid until the end of their first month.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Just re-read the article, seems that his signing on day and course overlapped and he asked to sign in later the same day and when asked why he gave details of what he was doing. The person who was dealing with his claim reported it and thats why his benefit was refused.

My friend once took an on-line test to work in a job centre, she failed miserably, she said the questions asked seem to be biased in favour of passing those people who are absolute bas***ds.

Any sign of compassion or symapthy in candidates selection of possible actions to given situations is seen as a weakness and you are eliminated from progressing further to make a formal application. "

They probably didn't believe his excuse and stopped payments till he was investigated. The rules are that you inform them of what you are doing.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *quirrel OP   Man
over a year ago

East Manchester

This happened over 2 months ago,its gone in the paper because he is going to court to fight his case, the training company has supplied all details to the paper and the DWP and as he has not paid anything back the borrowed cash has accumalated interest. The job centre discontinued all benefits and refused to comment.

Its the usual heavy handed unsympathetic approach of a govt department that punishes those who takes the initiative and tries to do things without their permission.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound


"This happened over 2 months ago,its gone in the paper because he is going to court to fight his case, the training company has supplied all details to the paper and the DWP and as he has not paid anything back the borrowed cash has accumalated interest. The job centre discontinued all benefits and refused to comment.

Its the usual heavy handed unsympathetic approach of a govt department that punishes those who takes the initiative and tries to do things without their permission."

Isn't that the point of rules? Taking the initiative is breaking the rules? I don't think it is right that those trying to improve their chances of employability should be penalised but that argues for changing the rules not allowing all breaches to be ignored.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Unfortunately as he was doing training arranged by himself, he was not available for work. To qualify for jobseekers you must be available to work, they do offer there own training and if you are on that then all is ok.

This is all made clear when you apply.

Its not right but he must have been aware of this before it did it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

When you sign on you sign an agreement to look for work.. If he wanted to do training off his own back all he had to do was speak to them first..

I'm sure they would of allowed it and could of changed hius agreement.

If you work for an employer would you just change you working agreement and expect your employer to carry on paying you or would you seek their approval first. Thaeres no difference

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Absolute nonsense,aslong as he applied for as many jobs as agreed.whats the problem.? Im guessing white british male.! Have to put it all in but not allowed any of it back.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iss_tressWoman
over a year ago

London


"Absolute nonsense,aslong as he applied for as many jobs as agreed.whats the problem.? Im guessing white british male.! Have to put it all in but not allowed any of it back."

Why would you need to mention race?

He made a mistake. A previous poster summed it up excellently: you wouldn't go off and do your own thing without prior agreement from your employer and expect to be paid.

Shame on you for bringing race into it!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ennyWTV/TS
over a year ago

Teesside

The DWP are a waste of time.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Just read in the local paper that a guy who had been unemployed for a year has had his unemployment payments stopped, the reason was he had borrowed money and paid to attend training courses which would have given him a better chance of getting paid work, rather than sitting around doing nothing but apply for work and claiming benefits he wanted to work to support his wife and kids so paid someone to train him so he would have more to offer.

His benefits had been stopped because by being on these trainng courses he was not able to take up work if it were offered.

After so much time I would think that the possibility of work suddenly appearing were close to zero.

The DWP position is that he wasnt actively seeking work so should lose his benefits.

Whats everyone elses opinion?"

To be honest I am pretty pissed of that someone on benefits with 4 kids gets approx £500 per week benefits. I think they should all be made to do voluntary work , some families in southampton have never worked me jason ash been a single parent for 11 years I have worked to support my son rather than relying on benefits

In this case I wish the guy luck he now has no choice but to get a job and I wish him well as he clearly is trying.

The good point is that without benefits he has removed the safety net and is more likely o succeed .

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eighleedsMan
over a year ago

leeds

similar thing happened to me about 4 years ago,

I was left a small amount of money by my mother, not a great deal, certainly not enough that I had to declare the amount to DWP and come off benefits,

Had been out of work for some time due to redundancy, I asked my Jobcentre plus advisor that I was thinking of going to do a driving Instructor course, and self fund it, which on me passing would lead to a guaranteed job, he agreed, as the course would be less than 16 hours a week, and that if I needed a signing day / time moving they could accommodate that as I was showing willing.

Couple of weeks later when I next had a meet with my advisor I saw a different one, who said my old advisor had moved onward, and she was my new one, she decided I was going on a job centre course (and A4E like venture local to Yorkshire called BEST) I explained what the previous advisor had agreed, and she said there were no notes on the system about that, so I was going on that course like it or not.

So muchfor trying to improve your self,

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Absolute nonsense,aslong as he applied for as many jobs as agreed.whats the problem.? Im guessing white british male.! Have to put it all in but not allowed any of it back."

Because he wouldn't of been available to start work or attend interviews.

All he had to doi was tell them about it.

He signed the agreement

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" To be honest I am pretty pissed of that someone on benefits with 4 kids gets approx £500 per week benefits. I think they should all be made to do voluntary work , some families in southampton have never worked me jason ash been a single parent for 11 years I have worked to support my son rather than relying on benefits

In this case I wish the guy luck he now has no choice but to get a job and I wish him well as he clearly is trying.

The good point is that without benefits he has removed the safety net and is more likely o succeed ."

I don't get comments like 'I am pretty pissed off that someone on benefits with 4 kids gets approx £500 per week benefits'.

Firstly the 500 is for the 4 kids too. Why should they miss out because the parents are not working?

Second, if its such a easy life being on benefits, why dont you quit your job and go on benefits? Of course you wont because guess what, its not that great.

Dont get why it pisses people off. Would you rather people on benefits struggled even more just so people like you feel better?

And by the way I have never been on benefits. I just think that people should stop having a go about Britain giving benefits to those who would struggle without it. This is a good thing not a bad one. People should be proud that in Britain, they try and help everyone in this way even if system is not perfect. Yes some people will take advantage of it but for the majority it is service which has helped them so much

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top