New Style JSA CC

Could do with some help on this one.

I claimed joint JSA in November 2017 after ending an ESA claim. Hubby worked part time up to the middle of 2018 then the work dried up. No work since, but contract not ended and work could be offered again at any time.

CCs issued in November 2017 were steps per week, not hours per week, as per the JSA Act. Both said "jobseekers allowance". Most recent DWP letter says income based JSA. No Class 1 NICS were used in the assessment.

The CCs remained the same up until yesterday. For 2½ months they've been "threatening" to change our CCs. I said fine. I know that the CC must comply with the law, but they think we must comply with the CC.

I won't go into what they shoved into the CCs. The roach assigned to my husband had a pre-written CC on his screen which he tried to foist on my husband without discussion. Hubby stood his ground and got various items deleted but missed some because I couldn't be there to help him, being busy myself attempting to get the roach in front of me to stop being anti-disabled. Hubby had to insist on having his disabilities listed on his CC due to the roach refusing to put them on his main record. At one point the roach took the p*ss out of my husband's tinnitus.

Turning to the roach assigned to me, he has been overtly aggressive, harassing and intimidating towards me about a UC claim that I will not make outside managed migration. He attempted to foist a 35 hour per week job search onto me (succeeded), a 90 minute travel distance (did not succeed) and a working week of 35 hours (did not succeed). I queried why the roach was putting 35 hours per week job search rather than steps. He ignored me. I asked why there was a daily sanction rate of £10.90 per day for 91 days. I pointed out that in a joint claim they'd be taking more than we were getting. This was fobbed off as well.

To get to the point we both signed the documents after an hour of pushing back against their scumbag behaviour. We did the best we could under the circumstances. It wasn't until we got home that I read the documents again and saw "new style JSA". All online websites say new style JSA lasts for 182 days and you can only claim it if you've had enough Class 1 NICS, worked for less than 16 hours per week, and are also entitled to claim UC. New style JSA is a contribution based benefit, not an income based one. They know we get income based JSA so why have they issued us with "new style JSA" CCs with Restart on them that NS JSA claimants aren't eligible for?

Also, in both CCs there is copious mention of "giving up a job" and "having a job" (my job) with payment being reduced if you do not look for work. Er, I don't have a job to give up. It's UC language, not JSA language. Giving up a job under JSA = closure of the claim, not payment reduction. It says lack of ASE will result in reduction of payment. Lack of ASE under JSA result in closure of the claim, not reduction in payments. The document I signed is for someone who has a job under UC and it's a threat from them that if they don't look for more hours that their UC will be reduced.

As far as I can see both CCs are bogus documents that wouldn't stand up in a tribunal. Please let me know if you disagree. I might have missed something in the gobbledegook paperwork they sh*t out every day.

Your old style JSA/CC remains in force unless there has been a relevant change in your circumstances.

I am assuming you are currently receiving Income Based JSA.  In this case, the new style JSACC regulations and procedures do not apply. At sometime in the near future you and others may be migrated to UC.

Request the guidance relevant to you both from your local Jobcentre.  A FOI request maybe necessary.

Just for info...

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/843720/adms8.pdf

Thanks I will read chapter 8.

Yes, currently receiving joint income based JSA. No contributions to be able to claim any sort of contribution based JSA, which would have run out a long time ago anyway.

No change to circumstances in regard to the claim first made in November 2017.

As a further note - the NSJSACC is dated 05/19.

It says:

If I leave my job or lose pay by choice without good reason, or because of my behaviour, this is known as misconduct, my payment will be reduced by £10.90 a day for up to 3 years.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1065250/dmgch34.pdf

34096 From 27.11.19 legislation1 is amended to remove 156 week sanctions from regulations.

Note 1: The maximum reduction period for any higher-level sanctionable failure that can be imposed on an award of JSA for failures that occur on or after 27.11.19 is 26 weeks. See guidance at DMG 34097 for guidance on the transitional provision to end 156 weeks sanctions already imposed for higher-level sanctionable failures that occurred prior to 27.11.19. 1 JSA & UC (Higher-level Sanctions) (Amdt) Regs 19 ; 2 JSA Regs, reg 69

When legislation was amended to remove 156 week sanctions from regulations I do not expect to see it on a CC.

The form NSJSACC 05/19 was issued to us on 26.4.22, yet it was out of date on 27.11.19.

The CC issued to us implies that a sanction of up to 3 years still exists. It does not.  

Why is our local joke shop using a CC form that should have been changed from "up to 3 years" to "26 weeks" after 27.11.19?

Their stupidly slow Absolut on changing claimant commitment and in my case a very very long time. Even worse, the contents what's written in them imo not worth toilet paper. Worse now, as that's:twisted: gone up in price

jobberpw wrote:Their stupidly slow Absolut on changing claimant commitment and in my case a very very long time. Even worse, the contents what's written in them imo not worth toilet paper. Worse now, as that's:twisted:  gone up in price

Agreed that the contents have no worth usually due to said contents not complying with the law but issuing a completely incorrect CC for a different type of benefit that falls under a completely different Act (JSA Act 2013)? They know we don't get that benefit. A NS JSA single claimant gets £77 per week. We get £120.05 for both of us, which is easily provable.

They wanted to impose UC style rules on each of us but they can't do that if they use the right CC (JSAg), which is steps per week, not hours per week. It even says steps in the new Restart JSA docs!

The roach imposed a 35 hour per week job search on me when the working hours are 25. That is direct disability discrimination. There is no excuse for it. Issuing IB JSA claimants with a contribution based NS JSA CC each is fraudulent.

The WC can't impose time to be spent on worksearch, this only applies to New Style JSA claimants.

https://data.parliament.uk/DepositedPapers/Files/DEP2020-0646/106._New_Style_JSA_only_v1.0.pdf

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2013/9780111531921/contents

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2013/9780111531921/regulation/9

D.Appleby wrote:The WC can't impose time to be spent on worksearch, this only applies to New Style JSA claimants.

Thanks for the links.  

No, I know they can't impose time spent on work search on JSA (IB) claimants, but they think we don't know that. I knew it at the time, but they would not listen. They think our signatures bind us to the document. They think wrong. It is going to boomerang on them. I will be ringing the 0800 number this morning to lodge a complaint.

I'm sure they use to put 35 hour jobsearch on legacy JSA cc, but I just checked mine again and it's not in it.

Although I came across this while looking into the the Universal Credit Circus i thought I'd insert it here just in case it helps others.

I outright refused once. I guess being on such a lucrative scheme as UC we have to work so hard for our loafs of bread and rice .

Some more info on this farce here regards to joke search. Id say if as they say they expect people to treat this as 'a job' in itself, then surely, they should be paying people accordingly. Oh no, wait! they are, as no difference between working and benefits for very many people: evil: .

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/548668/foi-4038-13.pdf

Claimants should treat this responsibility as their “job” and our
intention is that claimants should aim to spend as many hours looking for work
as we would expect them to spend in work . In bold NEWSFLASH. Due to my health & old age; i am looking to spend as less time in work as i possibly can .

I wonder what kind of mentality their using when imposing this joke search on some and not others  No doubt, its all reasonable, tailored and specific.

jobberpw wrote:Claimants should treat this responsibility as their “job” and our intention is that claimants should aim to spend as many hours looking for work as we would expect them to spend in work

Really? That's why the roach allowed that I can only work 25 hours per week but I must look for work for 35?  

I wonder what kind of mentality their using when imposing this joke search on some and not others

They are confused by 3 things:
UC (income based)
JSA IB (income based)
NS JSA (contribution based)

One of these is not the same as the others.

There is no contribution element in UC which is unfair towards people who have paid full stamp and who work less than 16 hours per week under a zero hours contract (ie get less than £77 per week). They created NS JSA to cover the contribution hole they created with UC. Full Class 1 NICS are needed to claim it. It lasts for 6 months. Their partner's circumstances are ignored. The partner of a NS JSA claimant does not exist for the DWP to be able to impose any rules on. It's single claimant only.

What they don't want are single people parking themselves in a zero hours contract after having worked full time, getting their rent paid via NS JSA and not trying to get more hours so they imposed UC rules on single NS JSA claimants to hassle them, but in order to recognise the work done they do not send NS JSA claimants on any schemes. However, the 6 months they are on NS JSA is counted towards the 9 months Restart eligibility so when they switch to UC they've got to go on Restart 3 months later whether they like it or not.

JSA IB - if you work under a zero hours contract it doesn't matter, they can send you on Restart. They can't, however, impose a 35 hour per week job search on an income based JSA claim. They refer to Restart but not on a CC. That's UC only. they have to send a written notification as outlined in the SAPOE legislation.  

They can impose NS JSA rules on NS JSA claimants. (JSA Act 2013)
They can impose JSA IB rules on JSA IB claimants. (JSA Act 1995)
They can impose UC rules on UC claimants. (Whatever garbage Act I haven't looked at yet that created UC.)

The law does not allow DWP staff to mix and match different laws to suit their agenda.

My hubby worked from 2013 to 2018 and he could still work if he was offered legit hours. The contract has not been terminated. We were both sent on the Work Programme for 2 years in 2014 and 2015 because we weren't entitled to NS JSA. They don't get to decide now that we are. Even when we were getting the bare minimum in JSA they sent us both to the WP and continuously harassed us.

We can both be referred to Restart, because we are actually on JSA IB, but they can't impose NS JSA 35 hour per week jobs search on both of us. I know it looks complicated but it really isn't.

As far as I can see both CCs are bogus documents that wouldn't stand up in a tribunal. Please let me know if you disagree. I might have missed something in the gobbledegook paperwork they sh*t out every day.

Totally agree Absolut, 100%. Further, what these so called agreements contain is a bloody joke too. All about inventing terms to tie people to do unrealistically. And yet, their poxy training manuals/guidance tells them the contrary .An 'agreement,' with a gun to the claimants head so to speak.

Absolut wrote:

jobberpw wrote:Claimants should treat this responsibility as their “job” and our intention is that claimants should aim to spend as many hours looking for work as we would expect them to spend in work

Really? That's why the roach allowed that I can only work 25 hours per week but I must look for work for 35?  

Yes yet another one of their delusions Absolut. Any job, any pay doing anything. They use to have a sign up in my roach shop pointing towards that 'great work ethic ' Too many, imo have been effectively brained washed by that bullshit and now paying a hefty price working for nothing. But hey! they still have a "job" . Dosent matter it pays the same as benefits. All makes perfectly good economic sense . Dont get me started on buying the yellow/red labelled food. Next thing Bodger and Co, will suggest we all go looking in the back of skips for lamb off cuts .

Absolut no doubt, roach shop would feel its perfectly 'reasonable' that after you've worked for 25 hours to do another 35 looking for work, as would be only reasonable to show that your willing  I'd better shut up as they monitor these boards and be given them valuable ideas for their sad little world.

Absolut OMG!! i was just kidding about doing a 35 joke search on top of 25 hrs work and see them lunatics actually imposed that crap on you   ?

Hope you gave them a complaint from hell or piece of your mind. Seems no end to their piss taking ways. I wonder, which joke shop moron thought that by 'doing more hours effectively looking at nothing' equates to a decent paying job in a reasonable location to where you live. Maybe we could all buy more lotto tickets and we will win the lottery. If we lived to be a thousand.

jobberpw wrote:Absolut OMG!! i was just kidding about doing a 35 joke search on top of 25 hrs work and see them lunatics actually imposed that crap on you    ?

I know lol. I didn't take it the wrong way. We know they are lunatics. They haven't got that message yet. They will, very soon. I sent a complaint.

I couldn't wrap my head around why, in general, the DWP thinks 70 hours ASE for a couple is ok. That's £665 per week gross income. Do we need £665 per week to get off UC (if we were on it)? No. Why not? No kids. The max we'd get is £332. That's 35 hours x NMW. In other words, the same as a single person, without kids. Granted, we do get more in JSA than a single person, it's £121.05 per week versus £77 but that's not double. 70 hours on the computer is double the cost a single person would have to pay to use a computer to look for work for 35 hours. It's all online now. Electricity costs us the same as everyone else yet we have to do twice as much online work search than a single person?

I am not having a go at single claimants here under any benefit type. We are single claimants if it's steps, but when they switch it to hours, it doesn't work. They've put 60 hours work in total across the claim. Er, no. It's 24 and that's it.

All the work I can do is desk based. The roach would not remove the 35 hours ASE. When I asked why not he said "You can work 5 hours per day, and 7 days per week x 5 hours is 35 hours". Apparently I don't get weekends off to recover because paid by an employer to work on a computer and paid by the DWP to be in front of a computer looking for work is not the same. My right wrist disagrees. My lower left back disagrees. He directly discriminated against me and the DWP is bang to rights on that one.

If I get referred onto Restart it has to be within 30 minutes of my home. It does not mean they can simply ring me instead. It's face to face according to the contract. If they can't see me within that distance then the provider can't accept the referral. If they can't refer me due to my being unsuitable, then they can't refer hubby either. It's both of us or neither of us. That's why the roach resisted reducing my travel distance and work search requirements. That way I looked suitable for Restart when I was not. They think if they can get my husband into work first via Restart then I won't have to work at all. How very old fashioned of them. I actually want to work and I resent what they are trying to do.

Nice work Absolut!

"If I get referred onto Restart it has to be within 30 minutes of my home."

I wasn't aware of that Absolut. Do you or anyone have a link to all the requirement's of this Circus 'Restart' ? As looks like another I and no doubt man others will be trying to avoid.

It maybe my age, just I am somewhat confused about all of these schemes on the market . There's : Restart/Kickstart, Ways to Work, and the old chestnut Work Program (HWP)... All seem to be the same old 'Cat sat on the mat' schemes? Going for the Three pronged assult are the JCP ???

Your not alone Pintel. My head is spinning with it all and far worse after listening to the Dr's delusional idea's this afternoon.

They are apparently going to throw millions more at roach shops. And I thought they wanted to save money. Would seem not.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/restart-provider-guidance

The guidance isn't for us, but lots can be gleaned from them, such as "eligibility" etc.

jobberpw wrote:"If I get referred onto Restart it has to be within 30 minutes of my home."I wasn't aware of that Absolut.  

The specific quote is:

2.152 To ensure that Restart is accessible to all Participants, all premises must be easily accessible to Participants, including those using public transport. Premises must meet all legal requirements and provide facilities commensurate with the requirements of this Restart Specification, and be compliant with the Equality Act 2010. Providers will be required to ensure that if Participants have to travel to meetings at the Provider’s premises, they can do so by public transport and such travel will take no longer than 90 minutes in each direction, by a route and means appropriate to their circumstances. Where a Participant’s health condition limits their ability to travel, or for any other reason where DWP have agreed a cap below 90 minutes, the Provider is expected to make appropriate arrangements to meet the Participant, for example at outreach locations.

Pintel wrote:It maybe my age, just I am somewhat confused about all of these schemes on the market . There's : Restart/Kickstart, Ways to Work, and the old chestnut Work Program (HWP)... All seem to be the same old 'Cat sat on the mat' schemes? Going for the Three pronged assult are the JCP ???

Kickstart - no longer running. Young people only.

Restart - UC and JSA IB claimants. Big problems where pre-WCA UC and disabled claimants is concerned.

Ways to Work - UC only, tricking JSA claimants into attending group sessions for jobs that are below min JSA hours. Not sure if they are including sick/disabled people.

Work and Health Programme - split into JETS and Core. Core - voluntary for the sick/disabled. JETS - UC and NS JSA only.

Thanks #Absolut .

Seems the have a 'course' for everyone .

I hear the latest is being called DEA: Dead End...again And: EOAB. Eating on a budget.

Update on the situation: incorrect CCs withdrawn, new correct ones issued. They basically asked us what we wanted in the CCs, which was weird as they are usually very dictatorial about it lol. Hubby even got his travel distance reduced.  

No response to my complaint letter yet but roach insisted on pinning me down to a time for a 3 way Restart call next time. I said he could do what he liked, it's not my referral, and that my agreement to be there at 11am wasn't consent to the call. No mandation letter yet. I expect it's in the post