Returning UK national treated as EEA national - worse position

I know that a British national who has worked in another EU state, on their return to the UK is ENTITLED to be treated as an EEA worker, with the same rights. Likewise if they exercise other treaty rights in another EU state, they can acquire the rights that
exercising that treaty right would give.

But do the DWP HAVE to treat them as an EEA national, if that would put them in a worse position?
I’ve seen a case of a young man from York being told that as he lost his habitual residence on return from working in Belgium for four months (and that’s another issue!) that he would be treated as an EEA national (I’m assuming as a jobseeker not a retained worker status - I don’t think as he was earning enough for the work to be ‘genuine and effective’).
So he’s been told he’ll not only be ineligible for JSA and HB for 3 months (because of the habitual residence loss) but that when he claims JSA it’ll only last 6 months. And presumably although i haven’t read this, if he claims HB after 01/04/14 he’ll not get that either.

This is the link to the news article: http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/11011326.York_man_refused_benefits_due_to_new_immigration_rules/?ref=var_0

Any thoughts?

Amazing, unless there is something else that is not included in the article and that the DWP are aware of, I can’t see how they have arrived at this decision.

There will be more of this I guess. FtT an UT get ready, a feel a rash of appeals on the way.

The York chap - as a British National he has satisfied RTR surely then he would simply have to challenge hab res element only and ‘centre of interest’ criteria.

Hopefully that would mean he would revert to being British once he/she has settled back (in his case should be straight away I would have thought).  So the whole scenario of JSA time limits and HB limits would not be applicable.

For those Brits away for longer than 4 months - satisfying the centre of interest criteria becomes more challenging I guess, especiallly if you can’t qualify for JSA or HB.

Looks like a whole host of negative DWP decisions are on course. Plus no legal aid for WB a win win for the Govt…

Hi.. I would challenge this on the basis that he never lost his HRT in the first place. He has not “entered” the Country in the last two years.

He only went on a short working holiday with every intention of returning to the UK and he has always considered his “centre of interest” to be the UK. In the old days the HRT only came into play if you had been out of the country for more than two years.

I would also challenge this as in direct conflict with and interferance of his right to the free movement of workers within the EU.

Threatening to remove a UK citizen from the benefit system on their return if they dare to excercise their Right of the Free Movement of Workers within th EU has got to be restrictive constraint upon the Directive.

I agree with all of the above, but is this not as well a “Swaddling” issue? Its been so long since I studied this case, but was this not about a returning UK national who had worked in France for some years and it was decided that either he was exempt from the HRT or he satisfied it from day 1? I presume this is still good law for the HRT test as it now applies to returning UK nationals?

“I’ve seen a case of a young man from York being told that as he lost his habitual residence on return from working in Belgium for four months….”

When you say, told; told by whom?  Was it someone on the phone in a contact centre or someone in the jobcentre that he went to?  If so then there is far too much of this going on.  Unqualified people giving wrong or misleading advice about subjects they know next to nothing about but pretending that they do, with an air of officialdom and authoritativeness that just discourages people from claiming that which they’ve every right to claim.

If it was a decision maker on a properly constituted claim then fair enough.  He is doing the job he is trained for and paid to do.  The claimant then has an easily exercisable remedy.  A review and an appeal.  I say easily exercisable, I’m overlooking for now, the chaos that is MR.

Nevip-

It was a news article - here’s the link that was on my original posting. Unfortunately I have no links with this case so cannot offer advice.

This is the link to the news article: http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/11011326.York_man_refused_benefits_due_to_new_immigration_rules/?ref=var_0

I have put in an FOI request but not yet had a satisfactory response.

If the EEA national is British you need to look at

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2006/1003/contents/made

ESPECIALLY REG 7, 8 and 15A, these should assist