Hi, I've recently had a CCG application refused for a client; with the refusal letter stating that the client is not in receipt of qualifiying benefit as he is on contribution based JSA. (He is a refugee who has been working previously.)

I've never come across this before, and don't really get too involved in the JSA aspect. I believe from reading the refusal letter that a client must be in receipt of income-based JSA.

Is there anyway around this through appeal? Could my client change to income-based JSA for the purpose of CCG?

Many thanks

Sadly - no your client can't change to income based job seekers allowance. Income based benefits were always meant to be "top ups" to other contributory benefits people are entitled to.
People unable to get a community care grant because not getting a qualifying income based benefit is a common problem. Especially for people getting incapacity benefit that takes them above the level to get income support.
How long has he been claiming contributory job seekers allowance? The contributory part runs out after 6 months.(182 days) The only way forward would be to wait and claim then if he is still unemployed of course. Many Benefit rules are just not fair!

There was discussion on here a few years ago along the lines of?

If you are a single person on CB JSA

With savings under £8,000

You also had underlying entitlement to IB JSA so could access a CCG
various regs were quoted in support.

It seemed good to me at the time but never did get the chance to try it.

You could try to argue that the rules are (possibly) indirectly discriminatory against men. This assumes that men are still more likely to be on contribution based JSA than women - I don't know if that is true or not.

This might trigger an argument that the rules are in breach of Article 14 ECHR in conjunction with Art 8 (right to private and family life). This would probably be more likely to apply where the claim is to ease exceptional pressure on claimant and family. Also more likely to apply now that tax credits have been introduced thereby removing entitlement to additions for Lone Parents who sign on (although why they would bother, I couldn't say). I guess it may apply also to people claiming under the other heads, but it might be more difficult to fit it in with Article 8.

All you need to do is find a solicitor who is willing to run with such a dodgy argument in the High Court.