Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
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 Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Guardian reporting that a carer exceeded her £120 earnings allowance while in receipt of a carers payment from DWP. She took unpaid leave from her low-paid job at Sainsbury’s and drew £64.80 a week in carer’s allowance so she could look after her partner full-time. The money – which, at most, amounted to £1.85 an hour – didn’t come close to paying the bills, but it was better than nothing. So she worked an extra shift. “It was just after his first or second chemo. He was so ill. He was really in a bad way, so it was just a case of needing to stop working and being there for him,” she says. DWP told her she had been fraudulently claiming carer’s allowance by failing to notify the government that she had taken on a third shift. It landed her with a bill for £5,738.40. Does seem unfair and unjust treatment of a person trying to pay their way. " unfortunatley if you dont let the benefits agency know your situation has changed they will come after every bit you have claimed from when your situation changed and you didnt inform them, they do let you know when you clain that u have to keep them informed, if you dont and they find out then there getting there money back, only good thing is you can offer them a few quid a week and they have to accept it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Guardian reporting that a carer exceeded her £120 earnings allowance while in receipt of a carers payment from DWP. She took unpaid leave from her low-paid job at Sainsbury’s and drew £64.80 a week in carer’s allowance so she could look after her partner full-time. The money – which, at most, amounted to £1.85 an hour – didn’t come close to paying the bills, but it was better than nothing. So she worked an extra shift. “It was just after his first or second chemo. He was so ill. He was really in a bad way, so it was just a case of needing to stop working and being there for him,” she says. DWP told her she had been fraudulently claiming carer’s allowance by failing to notify the government that she had taken on a third shift. It landed her with a bill for £5,738.40. Does seem unfair and unjust treatment of a person trying to pay their way." That lot doesn't add up. It says that she took unpaid leave, but then says that she was working 3 shifts. She's also quoted as saying "it was just a case of needing to stop working and being there for him", but at the same time she took on an extra shift, meaning that she had less time with him. It seems clear that this story is not being reported in a transparent fashion. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Guardian reporting that a carer exceeded her £120 earnings allowance while in receipt of a carers payment from DWP. She took unpaid leave from her low-paid job at Sainsbury’s and drew £64.80 a week in carer’s allowance so she could look after her partner full-time. The money – which, at most, amounted to £1.85 an hour – didn’t come close to paying the bills, but it was better than nothing. So she worked an extra shift. “It was just after his first or second chemo. He was so ill. He was really in a bad way, so it was just a case of needing to stop working and being there for him,” she says. DWP told her she had been fraudulently claiming carer’s allowance by failing to notify the government that she had taken on a third shift. It landed her with a bill for £5,738.40. Does seem unfair and unjust treatment of a person trying to pay their way. That lot doesn't add up. It says that she took unpaid leave, but then says that she was working 3 shifts. She's also quoted as saying "it was just a case of needing to stop working and being there for him", but at the same time she took on an extra shift, meaning that she had less time with him. It seems clear that this story is not being reported in a transparent fashion." she stopped working. Then went back doing two shifts. Taking the third then took her over. I think. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Guardian reporting that a carer exceeded her £120 earnings allowance while in receipt of a carers payment from DWP. She took unpaid leave from her low-paid job at Sainsbury’s and drew £64.80 a week in carer’s allowance so she could look after her partner full-time. The money – which, at most, amounted to £1.85 an hour – didn’t come close to paying the bills, but it was better than nothing. So she worked an extra shift. “It was just after his first or second chemo. He was so ill. He was really in a bad way, so it was just a case of needing to stop working and being there for him,” she says. DWP told her she had been fraudulently claiming carer’s allowance by failing to notify the government that she had taken on a third shift. It landed her with a bill for £5,738.40. Does seem unfair and unjust treatment of a person trying to pay their way." "That lot doesn't add up. It says that she took unpaid leave, but then says that she was working 3 shifts. She's also quoted as saying "it was just a case of needing to stop working and being there for him", but at the same time she took on an extra shift, meaning that she had less time with him. It seems clear that this story is not being reported in a transparent fashion." "she stopped working. Then went back doing two shifts. Taking the third then took her over. I think." Having now found the Guardian article, I see that the OP is a copy-paste from that article, with a few changes that reverse the chain of events. It looks like your assumption is correct. Interestingly the OP didn't copy the line which says "To this day, Grater blames herself for not telling the DWP she had taken on an extra shift". https://amp.theguardian.com/society/2024/apr/10/fined-6000-for-tiny-mistake-carer-penalised-for-extra-shift-at-supermarket | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Guardian reporting that a carer exceeded her £120 earnings allowance while in receipt of a carers payment from DWP. She took unpaid leave from her low-paid job at Sainsbury’s and drew £64.80 a week in carer’s allowance so she could look after her partner full-time. The money – which, at most, amounted to £1.85 an hour – didn’t come close to paying the bills, but it was better than nothing. So she worked an extra shift. “It was just after his first or second chemo. He was so ill. He was really in a bad way, so it was just a case of needing to stop working and being there for him,” she says. DWP told her she had been fraudulently claiming carer’s allowance by failing to notify the government that she had taken on a third shift. It landed her with a bill for £5,738.40. Does seem unfair and unjust treatment of a person trying to pay their way. That lot doesn't add up. It says that she took unpaid leave, but then says that she was working 3 shifts. She's also quoted as saying "it was just a case of needing to stop working and being there for him", but at the same time she took on an extra shift, meaning that she had less time with him. It seems clear that this story is not being reported in a transparent fashion. she stopped working. Then went back doing two shifts. Taking the third then took her over. I think. Having now found the Guardian article, I see that the OP is a copy-paste from that article, with a few changes that reverse the chain of events. It looks like your assumption is correct. Interestingly the OP didn't copy the line which says "To this day, Grater blames herself for not telling the DWP she had taken on an extra shift". https://amp.theguardian.com/society/2024/apr/10/fined-6000-for-tiny-mistake-carer-penalised-for-extra-shift-at-supermarket" When Guardian stories start getting distorted we really are straying some distance from the facts!!     | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"As far as i know they don’t fine you or charge you interest in these cases , you just pay back what you over claimed. So at that weekly rate it seems like it wasn’t one extra shift. It was a shift a week taking them over the allowance for almost 2 years. So they basically got caught trying to defraud the system and only have to pay back the fraudulently claimed cash. Doesn’t sound like an overly harsh punishment to me" the punishment may fit the crime... But the crime is of you warm a dollar over a very low limit you can't claim any carer allowance. Imo, that's a very poorly thought out law. I'm not sure if they have to pay it all back in one go either ? People who are living on three shifts per week are unlikely to have spare cash. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"As far as i know they don’t fine you or charge you interest in these cases , you just pay back what you over claimed. So at that weekly rate it seems like it wasn’t one extra shift. It was a shift a week taking them over the allowance for almost 2 years. So they basically got caught trying to defraud the system and only have to pay back the fraudulently claimed cash. Doesn’t sound like an overly harsh punishment to methe punishment may fit the crime... But the crime is of you warm a dollar over a very low limit you can't claim any carer allowance. Imo, that's a very poorly thought out law. I'm not sure if they have to pay it all back in one go either ? People who are living on three shifts per week are unlikely to have spare cash. " no you dont have to pay it all back in one hit, got overpaid by 1800 quid a few years back when i was getting tax credits, told em i could afford fiver a month they wasnt happy about it but short of taking me to court about they had to accept it as they knew if they took it further they wouldnt get very far as id made an offer to pay it back already | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It’s always interesting to see the glee with which people treat the life of a poor person being destroyed, especially when they bend over backwards to justify anything the Tories do." I don't see anyone displaying glee over this story. No one has shown anything other than sympathy. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not commenting on this specific case as not read original article. Surely what is required, for any benefit, is a sliding scale that adapts to personal circumstances and not a cliff edge approach. Sorry for my ignorance but how often is someone in receipt of carers allowance supposed to tell DWP of a change in circumstances, such as taking on a extra shift? Clearly if that extra shift is a permanent or long term arrangement, then common sense would say you need to tell DWP. But what if it is random and unpredictable?" The process is very simple You have a journal and you simply log on to tell them of a change of circumstances. The lady could have covered herself in less than a minute by letting the DWP know of her part time employment. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It’s always interesting to see the glee with which people treat the life of a poor person being destroyed, especially when they bend over backwards to justify anything the Tories do." . Most people simply expect those using the system to inform the DWP of any additional earnings. It takes less than a minute to log on and type a note to your adviser . All correspondence clearly advises of the need to update if your circumstances change. If most claimants use the system correctly why should she be entitled to special treatment. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It’s always interesting to see the glee with which people treat the life of a poor person being destroyed, especially when they bend over backwards to justify anything the Tories do.. Most people simply expect those using the system to inform the DWP of any additional earnings. It takes less than a minute to log on and type a note to your adviser . All correspondence clearly advises of the need to update if your circumstances change. If most claimants use the system correctly why should she be entitled to special treatment. " Its exactly this. There is no glee but its the consequences of her own dishonest actions coming back around. Same as the multiple taxi drivers that got no help during covid because they hadn’t been declaring their earnings to pay tax on. I wasn’t gleeful then either but they had to live with their own consequences. If you want to find a way to shave off the top when the rest of us are expected to stay inside the lines why are we then expected to feel bad for you when you dont get away with it? And i know this is low level finances in terms of tax and there are as people said the likes of ms mone who has run off with millions. I dont think its a case of go after one or the other, we should be pursuing both types of fraud. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not commenting on this specific case as not read original article. Surely what is required, for any benefit, is a sliding scale that adapts to personal circumstances and not a cliff edge approach. Sorry for my ignorance but how often is someone in receipt of carers allowance supposed to tell DWP of a change in circumstances, such as taking on a extra shift? Clearly if that extra shift is a permanent or long term arrangement, then common sense would say you need to tell DWP. But what if it is random and unpredictable? The process is very simple You have a journal and you simply log on to tell them of a change of circumstances. The lady could have covered herself in less than a minute by letting the DWP know of her part time employment. " In which case I have no sympathy for her as that doesn’t sound like a genuine mistake. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not commenting on this specific case as not read original article. Surely what is required, for any benefit, is a sliding scale that adapts to personal circumstances and not a cliff edge approach. Sorry for my ignorance but how often is someone in receipt of carers allowance supposed to tell DWP of a change in circumstances, such as taking on a extra shift? Clearly if that extra shift is a permanent or long term arrangement, then common sense would say you need to tell DWP. But what if it is random and unpredictable? The process is very simple You have a journal and you simply log on to tell them of a change of circumstances. The lady could have covered herself in less than a minute by letting the DWP know of her part time employment. In which case I have no sympathy for her as that doesn’t sound like a genuine mistake." "Grater believed she did not need to tell the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) about her modest increase in earnings because her universal credits had been reduced automatically." You only have to notify if you go over 151pw. Bit that after tax NI and expenses. So I can imagine it's not as easy as just looking at your pay packet. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"From the story as reported the claimant is offside. But for taking an extra shift in low paid employment. Where is the DWP latitude." The DWP has rules to prevent abuse of the system, they can't just let someone off because she's having a difficult time. "Former chancellor Nadhim Zahawi attempted fraud claiming £5,822.27 expenses for his second home energy bills that relates to electricity for his horses stabling on his ministerial expenses" The figure of £5,822.27 was for the energy use of his entire property, and so most of it was a legitimate expense. Only a part of it went to the stables, and he paid that back as soon as he became aware. "and a HMRC/ serious fraud office investigation of £30million loans he received for his company but failed to disclose. The latter brushed under the carpet" He lost his job as Tory Party Chairman, and Google is awash with press stories about it. I don't see how you think that it was "brushed under the carpet". | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not commenting on this specific case as not read original article. Surely what is required, for any benefit, is a sliding scale that adapts to personal circumstances and not a cliff edge approach. Sorry for my ignorance but how often is someone in receipt of carers allowance supposed to tell DWP of a change in circumstances, such as taking on a extra shift? Clearly if that extra shift is a permanent or long term arrangement, then common sense would say you need to tell DWP. But what if it is random and unpredictable? The process is very simple You have a journal and you simply log on to tell them of a change of circumstances. The lady could have covered herself in less than a minute by letting the DWP know of her part time employment. In which case I have no sympathy for her as that doesn’t sound like a genuine mistake."Grater believed she did not need to tell the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) about her modest increase in earnings because her universal credits had been reduced automatically." You only have to notify if you go over 151pw. Bit that after tax NI and expenses. So I can imagine it's not as easy as just looking at your pay packet. " dont know how many commenting on here have claimed benefits, but when you claim its explained to you if your sitution changes from when you claim you have to inform them, shes lucky she only has to pay back what was over claimed, they could of been proper shits and put sanctions on her claim and been given the bare minimum, im guessing those who are a bit disgusted with it have never had dealings with the benefits agency, they make it pretty clear what you can and cant do workwise | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It does read as harsh treatment I read UK taxpayers have paid out more than £34,000 to cover the cost of the science secretary Michelle Donelan’s libel case, more than double the sum the government had previously admitted" its not harsh treatment its the same treatment for anyone on benefits if you work more hours than your supposed to and they find out they will want there money back, the uk taxpayer may have paid out for the libel case but that money didnt come from a benefit claim that the person didnt stick to the rules for, u mite think its harsh but like i said further up the make it pretty clear when you claim what the rules are, christ if you miss an appointment with them and dont have a good reason they stop your benefits for a while | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Another case on the guardian today ‘Carer convicted over benefit error worth 30p a week fights to clear his name’ Forced to sell his home to repay nearly £20,000, years after ticking wrong box on carer’s allowance form and DWP acknowledged the error apparently. 30p a week over his allowdd adduce, really " He wasn't 30p/week over the allowance. The benefit for him was 30p/week more than what his son was getting. The guy said he wasn't working when he was, that's fraud. DWP have apparently written to him because an appeals court found he 'was probably being truthful', not quite the same as DWP saying they were wrong. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I read about a case this morning where every year for 5 years someone provided their P60 to DWP and yet they took no action. Then reclaimed the lot." Can you provide a link to that story? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I read about a case this morning where every year for 5 years someone provided their P60 to DWP and yet they took no action. Then reclaimed the lot. Can you provide a link to that story?" It was in my Apple News feed and just went back to find it and it has dropped off. I *think* it was the “i” but couldn’t swear to it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I read about a case this morning where every year for 5 years someone provided their P60 to DWP and yet they took no action. Then reclaimed the lot. Can you provide a link to that story? It was in my Apple News feed and just went back to find it and it has dropped off. I *think* it was the “i” but couldn’t swear to it." This one? Lesley Whitehouse, 53, from Coventry, spent years as the primary carer for her sister who has severe mental and physical disabilities. A social worker told her she was eligible for Carer's Allowance and helped her fill in the forms. She started a part-time job in a pub and sent a P60 to the DWP every year. About four years ago, she moved to a full-time position to support her two children. "I rang the DWP and told them to stop the carer's allowance," she said. "They asked me some questions. Then they came back and told me I shouldn't have been receiving it and sent me a bill of £18,000. "I just broke down in tears. I said 'what do you mean?' I didn't understand because they'd had my P60 each year. I felt like I was being penalised for being honest. "I wasn't even earning enough to support my family. I didn't have any savings. I was living month to month." She says she has taken on extra hours to repay £50 a month, adding: "I'll be paying it off for the rest of my life. I wish I'd never claimed it in the first place". | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I read about a case this morning where every year for 5 years someone provided their P60 to DWP and yet they took no action. Then reclaimed the lot. Can you provide a link to that story? It was in my Apple News feed and just went back to find it and it has dropped off. I *think* it was the “i” but couldn’t swear to it. This one? Lesley Whitehouse, 53, from Coventry, spent years as the primary carer for her sister who has severe mental and physical disabilities. A social worker told her she was eligible for Carer's Allowance and helped her fill in the forms. She started a part-time job in a pub and sent a P60 to the DWP every year. About four years ago, she moved to a full-time position to support her two children. "I rang the DWP and told them to stop the carer's allowance," she said. "They asked me some questions. Then they came back and told me I shouldn't have been receiving it and sent me a bill of £18,000. "I just broke down in tears. I said 'what do you mean?' I didn't understand because they'd had my P60 each year. I felt like I was being penalised for being honest. "I wasn't even earning enough to support my family. I didn't have any savings. I was living month to month." She says she has taken on extra hours to repay £50 a month, adding: "I'll be paying it off for the rest of my life. I wish I'd never claimed it in the first place". " Yeah that looks like it ta. Though the timeframe isn’t clear so I was wrong to state every year for five years, it just says she sent P60 every year. I am not commenting on whether she did wrong, just the point on the P60. Surely DWP would have spotted she was earning over the threshold within 12 months rather than letting the overclaim and debt build up? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Another case on the guardian today ‘Carer convicted over benefit error worth 30p a week fights to clear his name’ Forced to sell his home to repay nearly £20,000, years after ticking wrong box on carer’s allowance form and DWP acknowledged the error apparently. 30p a week over his allowdd adduce, really " Is that the guy that was earning £7.50 an hour as a taxi driver since 2002 or something ? Sounds innocent  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I read about a case this morning where every year for 5 years someone provided their P60 to DWP and yet they took no action. Then reclaimed the lot. Can you provide a link to that story? It was in my Apple News feed and just went back to find it and it has dropped off. I *think* it was the “i” but couldn’t swear to it. This one? Lesley Whitehouse, 53, from Coventry, spent years as the primary carer for her sister who has severe mental and physical disabilities. A social worker told her she was eligible for Carer's Allowance and helped her fill in the forms. She started a part-time job in a pub and sent a P60 to the DWP every year. About four years ago, she moved to a full-time position to support her two children. "I rang the DWP and told them to stop the carer's allowance," she said. "They asked me some questions. Then they came back and told me I shouldn't have been receiving it and sent me a bill of £18,000. "I just broke down in tears. I said 'what do you mean?' I didn't understand because they'd had my P60 each year. I felt like I was being penalised for being honest. "I wasn't even earning enough to support my family. I didn't have any savings. I was living month to month." She says she has taken on extra hours to repay £50 a month, adding: "I'll be paying it off for the rest of my life. I wish I'd never claimed it in the first place". Yeah that looks like it ta. Though the timeframe isn’t clear so I was wrong to state every year for five years, it just says she sent P60 every year. I am not commenting on whether she did wrong, just the point on the P60. Surely DWP would have spotted she was earning over the threshold within 12 months rather than letting the overclaim and debt build up?" I found that on BBC. It states that DWP systems are capable of detecting over claiming. No idea how true that is. What it does show is that DWP are fucking useless, like a lot of civil departments tbf. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Another case on the guardian today ‘Carer convicted over benefit error worth 30p a week fights to clear his name’ Forced to sell his home to repay nearly £20,000, years after ticking wrong box on carer’s allowance form and DWP acknowledged the error apparently. 30p a week over his allowdd adduce, really He wasn't 30p/week over the allowance. The benefit for him was 30p/week more than what his son was getting. The guy said he wasn't working when he was, that's fraud. DWP have apparently written to him because an appeals court found he 'was probably being truthful', not quite the same as DWP saying they were wrong. " Feel like people are also conveniently focussing the narrative on the “huge” numbers people have to repay, and forgetting that means the huge number has been claimed in error or worse dishonesty | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Several cases of this on the bbc today. Common theme was that they were all claiming when they shouldn't have. Mostly they were entitled to start with but when their circumstances changed they did not inform the relevant people. One thing though, the article mentioned that the HMRC system is linked to the DWP and shows when a person earns more than agreed. However the DWP don't seem to act for ages and by the time they do the debt has built up. Think I have that right" that's how I read it too. Any over payment after the alert date should be written off imo. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Another case on the guardian today ‘Carer convicted over benefit error worth 30p a week fights to clear his name’ Forced to sell his home to repay nearly £20,000, years after ticking wrong box on carer’s allowance form and DWP acknowledged the error apparently. 30p a week over his allowdd adduce, really He wasn't 30p/week over the allowance. The benefit for him was 30p/week more than what his son was getting. The guy said he wasn't working when he was, that's fraud. DWP have apparently written to him because an appeals court found he 'was probably being truthful', not quite the same as DWP saying they were wrong. Feel like people are also conveniently focussing the narrative on the “huge” numbers people have to repay, and forgetting that means the huge number has been claimed in error or worse dishonesty" What's the saying, ignorance is no excuse ? The rules appear to be crystal clear | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Another case on the guardian today ‘Carer convicted over benefit error worth 30p a week fights to clear his name’ Forced to sell his home to repay nearly £20,000, years after ticking wrong box on carer’s allowance form and DWP acknowledged the error apparently. 30p a week over his allowdd adduce, really He wasn't 30p/week over the allowance. The benefit for him was 30p/week more than what his son was getting. The guy said he wasn't working when he was, that's fraud. DWP have apparently written to him because an appeals court found he 'was probably being truthful', not quite the same as DWP saying they were wrong. Feel like people are also conveniently focussing the narrative on the “huge” numbers people have to repay, and forgetting that means the huge number has been claimed in error or worse dishonesty What's the saying, ignorance is no excuse ? The rules appear to be crystal clear " "If your earnings are sometimes more than £151 a week you might still be eligible for Carer’s Allowance. Your average earnings may be calculated to work out if you’re eligible." So may be okay... Depends how average earning are taken. Also earnings isn't clear 'Calculating your earnings Your earnings are any income from employment and self-employment after tax, National Insurance and expenses. Expenses can include: 50% of your pension contributions equipment you need to do your job, for example specialist clothing travel costs between different workplaces that are not paid for by your employer, for example fuel or train fares business costs if you’re self-employed, for example a computer you only use for work" So it's more than just looking at my take home. And all this after caring for 35 plus hours and doing three shifts at Tesco. I just wish we hold up the same bar to others. The number of apologists we had during parygate and the like! People who wrote the rules! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Time to reform the social care system in entirety, as Johnson pretended and failed to do | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Another case on the guardian today ‘Carer convicted over benefit error worth 30p a week fights to clear his name’ Forced to sell his home to repay nearly £20,000, years after ticking wrong box on carer’s allowance form and DWP acknowledged the error apparently. 30p a week over his allowdd adduce, really He wasn't 30p/week over the allowance. The benefit for him was 30p/week more than what his son was getting. The guy said he wasn't working when he was, that's fraud. DWP have apparently written to him because an appeals court found he 'was probably being truthful', not quite the same as DWP saying they were wrong. Feel like people are also conveniently focussing the narrative on the “huge” numbers people have to repay, and forgetting that means the huge number has been claimed in error or worse dishonesty What's the saying, ignorance is no excuse ? The rules appear to be crystal clear "If your earnings are sometimes more than £151 a week you might still be eligible for Carer’s Allowance. Your average earnings may be calculated to work out if you’re eligible." So may be okay... Depends how average earning are taken. Also earnings isn't clear 'Calculating your earnings Your earnings are any income from employment and self-employment after tax, National Insurance and expenses. Expenses can include: 50% of your pension contributions equipment you need to do your job, for example specialist clothing travel costs between different workplaces that are not paid for by your employer, for example fuel or train fares business costs if you’re self-employed, for example a computer you only use for work" So it's more than just looking at my take home. And all this after caring for 35 plus hours and doing three shifts at Tesco. I just wish we hold up the same bar to others. The number of apologists we had during parygate and the like! People who wrote the rules! " If your job is tesco none of those expenses are relevant and you can just take the number for earnings right off the net pay line in your pay slip But nice try | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Another case on the guardian today ‘Carer convicted over benefit error worth 30p a week fights to clear his name’ Forced to sell his home to repay nearly £20,000, years after ticking wrong box on carer’s allowance form and DWP acknowledged the error apparently. 30p a week over his allowdd adduce, really He wasn't 30p/week over the allowance. The benefit for him was 30p/week more than what his son was getting. The guy said he wasn't working when he was, that's fraud. DWP have apparently written to him because an appeals court found he 'was probably being truthful', not quite the same as DWP saying they were wrong. Feel like people are also conveniently focussing the narrative on the “huge” numbers people have to repay, and forgetting that means the huge number has been claimed in error or worse dishonesty What's the saying, ignorance is no excuse ? The rules appear to be crystal clear "If your earnings are sometimes more than £151 a week you might still be eligible for Carer’s Allowance. Your average earnings may be calculated to work out if you’re eligible." So may be okay... Depends how average earning are taken. Also earnings isn't clear 'Calculating your earnings Your earnings are any income from employment and self-employment after tax, National Insurance and expenses. Expenses can include: 50% of your pension contributions equipment you need to do your job, for example specialist clothing travel costs between different workplaces that are not paid for by your employer, for example fuel or train fares business costs if you’re self-employed, for example a computer you only use for work" So it's more than just looking at my take home. And all this after caring for 35 plus hours and doing three shifts at Tesco. I just wish we hold up the same bar to others. The number of apologists we had during parygate and the like! People who wrote the rules! If your job is tesco none of those expenses are relevant and you can just take the number for earnings right off the net pay line in your pay slip But nice try " fair although they may have pension conts. Also If you pay a carer to look after the disabled person or your children while you work, you can treat care costs that are less than or equal to 50% of your earnings as an expense. The carer must not be your spouse, partner, parent, child or sibling. There's other stuff that doesn't count as income. Point is, the system isn't always straight forward and it's easy to fuck up. Second point is, I hope everyone who says they should be done are happy of they got caught doing 21mp in a 20. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Guardian reporting that a carer exceeded her £120 earnings allowance while in receipt of a carers payment from DWP. She took unpaid leave from her low-paid job at Sainsbury’s and drew £64.80 a week in carer’s allowance so she could look after her partner full-time. The money – which, at most, amounted to £1.85 an hour – didn’t come close to paying the bills, but it was better than nothing. So she worked an extra shift. “It was just after his first or second chemo. He was so ill. He was really in a bad way, so it was just a case of needing to stop working and being there for him,” she says. DWP told her she had been fraudulently claiming carer’s allowance by failing to notify the government that she had taken on a third shift. It landed her with a bill for £5,738.40. Does seem unfair and unjust treatment of a person trying to pay their way. " this happens a lot. It happened to me many years ago. I ended up paying back over 3 times what I'd earned.. even though technically I'd not gone over the amount. In my case each week I'd only done 2 shifts but the way they did their wages. Some weeks it fell that I'd get paid for 3 shifts in one week. Id declared it. But I found myself in trouble and under investigation as apparently the weeks I'd got paid for shifts had taken me over ... and they made me pay all my carers allowance back that I'd had those weeks. ( I'd still only ever done 2 shifts a week..taking home 58.50 per shift... I also was then asked to pay any council tax rebate back.. plus housing ... so it ended up having cost me over 4k to go to work. Cali | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Guardian reporting that a carer exceeded her £120 earnings allowance while in receipt of a carers payment from DWP. She took unpaid leave from her low-paid job at Sainsbury’s and drew £64.80 a week in carer’s allowance so she could look after her partner full-time. The money – which, at most, amounted to £1.85 an hour – didn’t come close to paying the bills, but it was better than nothing. So she worked an extra shift. “It was just after his first or second chemo. He was so ill. He was really in a bad way, so it was just a case of needing to stop working and being there for him,” she says. DWP told her she had been fraudulently claiming carer’s allowance by failing to notify the government that she had taken on a third shift. It landed her with a bill for £5,738.40. Does seem unfair and unjust treatment of a person trying to pay their way. " . Where does it say that she was fined? On a simplistic basis she was asked to repay money to which she was.not entitled . Where did the DWP use the teem fraud . ?. No further penalties were imposed on her. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
