new DMG memo relating to the delay in the migration of child elements of IS/JSA to CTC ... says that new IS/JSA claimants with children who have not claimed CTC will be paid IS/JSA child elements/premiums

... is this happening?

i note that cpag say that unless they were getting IS/JSA in April 2004, then a new claimant would need to claim CTC for their children ... though in the 2004 "mesher", at pages 284/285, there are differing opinions on the interpretation of the regs

new memo @ http://www.dwp.gov.uk/publications/dwp/dmg/memletrs/memjsa96.pdf

not in my experience! as far as i'm aware new claims from April 2004 have excluded payments for children, and on change over from IS to JSA or vice versa, with continuity between claims, the children have been excluded from the 'new claim' date. we have been advising new claimants that IS/JSA will not be paid for children since last year.

just looked at memo IS/JSA 64. DOH! doesn't near cover it...


jan

Sweet and Maxwell's Social Security Legislation 2004 advises -

"... it is unclear whether claimants who have a child or young person who is a member of their family but who were not in receipt of income support before April 6, 2004 can make a new claim … on or after that date and be awarded a personal allowance for a child or young person",

although "in the view of the editors" an interpretation that leads to such a person being entitled to the child elements of income support/income-based JSA "represents the more natural meaning of the provision.

"From 6 April 2004, a child can only be included in your claim in the following circumstances … you are claiming income support or income based jobseeker's allowance; and your current claim … began before 6 April 2004; and you had a dependent child or children included in that claim before 6 April 2004 but you have not yet been awarded child tax credit.

In all other circumstances, a child cannot be included in your claim. Instead you will need to claim CTC for the child."

"... I can confirm the contents of DMG memo 96 are an accurate reflection of the law.

... the memo .... refer(s) to the legislation that supports the line adopted (incidentally the message in this memo is exactly the same as that issued over a year ago in DMG memo 64 (para 5)) ...

Basically the abolition of an income support child allowance is related to the claimant's award of child tax credit and not the claiming of benefit after 6.4.04 (there are some exceptions, which are described in memo 64)."

i'm reeling a little with this one shawn - obviously i don't see people without problems : ) so i can't say with complete confidence that the DWP has NOT been following its own guidance, but...

a number of clients had a fair amount of grief whilst waiting for CTC, and receiving no IS/JSA child payments, and i've seen enough award notices to post- 6.4.04 claimants to suggest there was more than random bad luck behind the omision of their child payments...

a colleague here was working in a jobcentre in april 2004, and she was certain no child payments would be included...

what has been happening...? egg on face notwithstanding, child-less IS/JSA assessments don't put themselves on the computer system do they?

jan

update ... despite the dwp's response outlined above .... if you now have a look at the memo ..... as if by magic .... all reference to new claimants being able to get child elements of is/jsa has been removed ......

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/publications/dwp/dmg/memletrs/memjsa96.pdf

unbelievable!!

did you have a hard copy of the original version?

shawn - i would really like to know what's going on. i've looked at commencement order 4 (but not the latest SI) and i don't think i have the faintest clue what it means!!!

has anybody here been advising people they can claim IS/JSA for children since April 2004, and finding that the DWP awards child increases?

if the DWP could and should have been paying child increases and should continue to do so, and i have been giving incorrect advice for a year, and may still be doing so, i certainly need to know, but there's also a need to know how much further this goes.

does this mean that CPAG also got it wrong?
does it mean that the DWP got it wrong?
does it mean that there's a cover up going on?
does it mean the legislation is dangerously unintelligible?

jan

further response from the DWP -

'The aspect of memo 96 withdrawn was not removed because it was incorrect (it was removed for other reasons) ....'

i must admit i'm baffled!!!

can anyone make sense of this?

jan

shawn

do you have any further information on this issue?

i've been told that from April 2004, the IS/JSA computer systems assessed new claims at couple rate only, even though child details from the claim forms were entered, 'for accuracy'.

in other words, the law said children were excluded by the making of a tax credit claim, whereas the computer system was programmed to exclude them by date of claim.

is anything happening?

jj

i'm never quite sure how confusing my posts are-
should have said -

in other words, the law said children were excluded by the making of a tax credit claim, whereas the computer system was programmed to exclude them by date of _IS/JSA_ claim. (ie post April 2004)

hi jj ... no nothing more on this i'm afraid - shawn

hi shawn

i just had one of those moments where i think i must be the only person in the world doesn't know what the H stands for in Jeesus H Christ!

dratted scary black helicoptor jobbies - i'm going to get some sleep, before i start hallucinating about the queen's speech again. lol!

jan

have discovered that although the IS computer system won't allow children on new claims, it will allow a reduced benefit sanction for non compliance with sec. 6 of Child Support Act, reducing personal IS to £33.99....

even when...the Secretary of State hasn't issued notice...
there is no qualifying child in the assessment...
the claimant is not a parent...