Bit of a background just to put it in context.

My client was entitled to full company sick pay for 6 months. He hadn't realised at the time this pay would include his ssp.

His employers inadvertently continued to pay him full wage for nearly a year and are now trying to recover £10K.

Only then did he realise his pay had included ssp which obviously stopped after 28 weeks but they'd never supplied him with an SSP1 to clam IB.

He's since claimed IB but it's classed as a new IB claim. They have backdated the claim 3 months but not only has he had 3 more waiting days but he has had to start on the short term lower rate of IB when he should really be on the long term rate now.

He's appealed and the hearing's imminent. I don't know whether there are any grounds or whether his only recompense would be from his employers. Help please.

Sue

thinking about this ... .

contract issue with employer - he shoudl have noticed they'd paid him longer than they should ....one assumes he knew his contractual entitlement, it's something most of us know without thinking about/having to look up - have you conferred with your employment law colleagues?

Most of our clients don't even know what a contractual right is, let alone what theirs are!!!

At this point I'm not involved in that side of things as his union is dealing with this for him. At least it was uplifting to hear that at least one of my clients (out of the thousands over the years) is a union member!

Fri 25-Apr-08 11:00 AM by Tony Bowman

SSP/IB rules are horrible...

Have a look at reg 7 IB regs.

I had a similiar case a while back and we sought a revision on the basis that IB entitlement should start at the STHR as reg 7 provides for days of entitlement to SSP to be included in the calculations of days of entitlement for IB purposes.

I don't know for sure that this is correct - didn't really understand the regs - but thought it worth a shot, especially as it was a continuous period of incapacity for work.

Unfortunately, the client ceased to give instruction so the outcome was never known...

We also calculated what he lost in IB and suggested he negotiate with employer to reduce overpayment by the same amount.

Fri 02-May-08 09:45 AM by suelees

I'm living in hope that someone else will come in on this. I'm with Tony on this but can't resolve it and so don't know whether there's (LSC funding) merit in me continuing to act.

I've been trying to get through to CPAG SSS but it's a busy busy line.

Thanks
Sue

Sue

My view is that the Department is correct.

The starting point is section 30B(2) of the Contributions and Benefits Act. Then go to section 30D(3) which then leads to section 7(1)(a) of the ICB Regs. This allows for days of SSP to count towards days of entitlement to the short-term lower rate but only when the first day of ICB entitlement starts within 8 weeks of SSP ending.

Confusion arises because of the use of the phrase “period of incapacity for work” in reg 7 but the phrase must be read as a whole; “period of incapacity for work to which that calculation relates”. This means the period of incapacity for work is a period beginning with the first day of ICB entitlement and not the period of incapacity for work as a whole. The reg would make no sense at all otherwise.

This is how I read the regs but as they are appallingly drafted I could easily be wrong.

Let us know the outcome.

Regards
Paul

Typical - this is partner of a JCP clerk and I wanted a good result!!

I have a very similar case and have argued on the same basis Tony did. Will let you know what response I get.

That'd be great thanks. Is it with a DM or is it an appeal?

Oh sorry this is my first day back and I've just come across a note on my desk as I'd asked a colleague to ring CPAG SSS to query this.

Employer under duty to inform employee end of SSP and provide form SSP (Gen) Regs 15(3). It's therefore not SS law but likely to be employment law.

Mine is still with DM but have just had call from the client to the effect that revision has been refused (she's going to drop letter off for me). Will see what it says. In my case, the client's employer did send the SC1 form when SSP expired so we have no come-back on them. Client rang contact centre to make her claim for IB but was apparently told she couldn't claim until employer had ceased paying her. As her contractual sick pay didn't expire for a further 5 months, she delayed claiming until then. IB was backdated 3 months but is being paid at STLR. We've requested compensation on basis of misadvice for period from SSP ending to IB starting but still have the issue of what rate of IB she should be recieving now. Will keep you posted.

Ah yeah a bit different. SSS (gawd bless em) have kindly got back to us and there might now be a light at the end of the tunnel using a somewhat obscure reg - well it wasn't obvious to me anyway. I'm not being deliberately evasive but I'm waiting for them to get back to us and so ditto with the keeping posted.