Some decide that they have taken all they need from the forum and moved on, some feel they have given all they can and moved on. Some may have been a bit naughty and may have been moderated, and some (particularly posters on the ESA threads) have become so ill that the forum is the furthest thing from their minds. And of course, some, we will never know what became of them. Some people who 'disappear' may still here, albiet as viewers only or perhaps using a new username. Sometimes they have posted under a username for a period of time and no longer want to be associated with their 'old' threads for reasons which are personal to them. Who knows. The saddest thing I find is when a member who is known to be ill disappears and we don't know where have gone - we don't know if the worst has happened and I personally always wonder if there was more that I could have done for them. There is a member who I miss dearly and who sadly we will never be able to see grace the forums again. I still smile when I think of him and of how very good to me he was when I first joined CAG. He made me laugh, he made me cry and he was there for me through pm's when times were tough. Members come and members go. Some of them make such an impact with us that they will remain in our minds and hearts forever.

Yes, they do deduct insurance that is available or due to the claimant/responsible person. That still leave £15 unaccounted for. When she went to arrange the funeral, did they give her a quote or an estimate of what the expenses would be? Again, there is reason why I ask. With an estimate, this is just a guess and the cost can go either up or down. But if she was given a quote, this is how much it will be and they cannot charge more than what is in a quote. Has your mother looked into whether she could apply for the bereavement payment? This is a lump sum payment of £2000, and may go some way toward the remaining costs. More information here Also, as another person mentioned there are some charities that can help with funeral costs. For example, if he was a war veteran, the vets agency offers assistance and some charities offer assistance if he died from a specific illness. It's worth looking into these to see if there is any other assistance available. Losing a loved one is enough to have to cope with in itself, without having to deal with all of this on top of it. I hope she manages to get some sort of help. Please do not hesitate to post further questions if you think we may be able to help.

DWP can be statute barred but there is a lot of misconception about this. I'll strip it down. They have 6 years to reclaim debt. If they don't claim within that period, the debt cannot be enforced in court. However, it can still be recovered by making deductions from prescribed benefit or state pension, regardless of how much time has passed. In other words, if they haven't enforced it within 6 years then they can only get it back either voluntarily from the debtor or from the debtors benefits or state pension if they don't voluntarily repay the debt.

I'm surprised that they advised you to claim a Crisis Loan for work related travelling expenses. They really ought to have considered this under the advisers discretionary fund. Go back to the jobcentre and ask them to to consider assisting you under the advisers discretionary fund.

Bereavement Allowance Bereavement Payment Widowed Parents Allowance. comprise the bereavement benefits. None of them are dependent on the income/capital you have, therefore the income from the Pension will not affect them Click the link here for more information on Bereavement Benefits. As the previous poster mentioned there are going to be changes to bereavement welfare support however those changes will not affect anyone who is in receipt of the bereavement welfare support when the changes come in.

Hi Sarah. Sorry to hear your mother in law is having to go through this. An appeal can only be successful where there the Social Fund has not applied the law correctly to the facts of the claim. The Funeral Payment is paid in accordance with the Social Fund Funeral and Maternity expenses regulations 2005. The regulations (specifically regulation 9 - click here to link to it) only allows for specific costs to be paid by the social fund plus a maximum contribution of £700 toward other non specific expenses, and it appears from the breakdown of the bill you have provided that the Social Fund have met the costs allowed - however I do have a query about the cemetery fees. You say the Social Fund have paid £1055 but the cemetery fees are stated as £580 on the bill breakdown you provided. The cemetery fees plus £700 is £1280. Can you please tell me what area your father in law was buried in? You can pm it to me if you feel more comfortable to share the information this way. The reason I am asking is because I am trying to establish if there are more costs that should have been awarded by the Social Fund for the burial but the Social Fund use local pricing structures for burial costs so that is why I need to know where he was buried, please. I'll look into that for you once I have the area from you. I might need to come back with further questions later. The cost of a coffin is not included in specified expenses. There is scope to allow the reasonable cost of one return journey for her having to travel to attend the funeral however they cannot pay this cost as a specific expense if it is a limousine or similar which is travelling as part of the funeral cortege - they may include it under the £700 limit though.

I just want to give a little reassurance here. As all members will be aware from the forum rules, any person claiming to represent a company and wishing to post on CAG in such a capacity must go via admin for approval. We allow such representatives here only when it appears from discussion between the company and our admin that it may be in the best interests of our members. This does not strike me as something that is in the best interests of our members. By the time the majority of people come to CAG for assistance with a claim that involves an ATOS assessment, it is because they have already been through an ATOS assessment and are unhappy with the results. In those cases, members usually wish to appeal against the decision which involves DWP and the Tribunal Service with very few claimants having contact with ATOS again unless they wish to complain. If they do wish to complain, then presumably claimants will have been sent literature before an ATOS assessment in any case - if they want to go to ATOS whether it is via a PR company or otherwise, they have ATOS' contact details and will contact them of their own free will if that is their wish. Safe and comfortable environment? People come to CAG because they feel this is a safe and comfortable environment in which to discuss their concerns and seek support and advice.

I agree that seeing your MP is a good idea - you don't need to wait for his/her next surgery, you can contact him or her by phone, letter, or email and if they want to see copies of correspondence, you can arrange a private appointment with him or her. However you do need immediate financial assistance in the meantime whilst this is dealt with. Do make a new claim whilst you are appealing/complaining against the closure of this one. If your appeal is successful, you would get the backdated monies but in the meantime you have nothing to live on so a new claim is important. As soon as you have made your new claim (by phone if possible as it will be quicker), call crisis loans and apply for a Crisis Loan, stating that you need it as an alignment to benefit. Crisis Loans which are given as an alignment to benefit are not affected by and not counted in the 3 awards rule (a person can only have 3 loans in a rolling 12 month period). I would also encourage you to apply for financial redress for maladministration - raise this within the body of your complaint. More information on this by clicking here The phone bill here is your secret weapon because once you show that you called a departmental number on that date it is then up to them to locate the details of that phone call, which should at the very least be on the notes of your computerised records. If they have no trace of that call but you have a bill showing you called them, then they have little choice but to accept that the details of the phone call were as you have stated. You are correct to with hold personal information from the letter - this protects both you and CAG. In terms of recordings, this is an awkward area really. There is no law that prevents you from covertly recording another individual as such, the laws relate to how such a covert recording may be used. If this were before a court, it would be at the court's discretion whether or not the recording could be admitted into evidence. You could certainly advise them that you have been recording them and have evidence that your behavior was not as they say it was however, be aware that DWP don't like these devices being used in JCP offices because there is always a risk that such a device can pick up discussions between other claimants and their advisors. If they know you are using one, they may well try and get you to agree to stop using it and if you don't, they may seek an injunction to prevent you from entering JCP premises. For the CCTV yes, you can submit a SAR for a copy of this to be sent to you - they have 40 days to comply. They may be reluctant over it - again because it may show other individuals going about their business and you are only entitled to data held about yourself however others here on CAG have successfully obtained CCTV data on themselves not only in DWP but in other places. I hope this helps for now but in the meantime if you have any questions or need further information please just ask - and do keep us posted. Outcomes posted on here helps others who find themselves in similar situations at a later date.

Threads merged. Please do not start multiple threads for the same consumer issue. Thank you.

The jobcentre may only keep clerical records dating back to 2010 but if your claim was computerised - and most are - the Benefit Delivery Centre will still have computerised records of your claim. If your claim was clerical it should still show a clerical interest on the Customer Information System. Send them a SAR (I've attached one for your use) which they will have to forward on to the relevant benefit centre. State on the SAR that you want copies of your records showing which benefits you claimed for these dates. The Benefit Centre must comply, or provide a written explanation of why they cannot comply within 40 days of receipt. The DWP don't charge for SARS. dwp sar.rtf

Hi Dawn. I'm not happy with those dates. I'm going to ask another member of the Site Team who is more knowlegable on ESA processing than I am to have a look at your thread. If you have been misadvised by the DWP and that has caused you financial detriment, this is known as 'maladministration' and you can seek financial redress. The guidance that is used by DWP on financial redress applications is here (click the link), but as I say, I'm going to ask someone else who knows more about processing of ESA to take a look.

Threads merged. Jacob18, please do not start multiple threads for the same consumer issue. Thanks.

This post is over a year old. Not that, that makes the issue any less relevant - just pointing it out, mainly because there appears to be a trend of old threads being posted on really!

Just for clarity in case anyone who currently has a claim is worried they are getting kicked off it in the near future - they have not brought it in. They have proposed it, but it is not yet law. If it does become law, there will likely be transitional protection for those already in receipt until they have a change of circumstances; there usually is with these types of major changes to welfare law. Now I've got that out of the way I can give my tuppenceworth... I think it's bloody ridiculous. In one breath he wants to get rid of this 'irresponsible' culture where people expect the tab to be picked up by others (or words to that effect that he has said), in the next he is wanting grown adults who are of legal age for everything else to fall back on mam and dad to pick up the tab. How, exactly does that instill any sense of responsibility into people? It doesn't - for those who are irresponsible (and they are certainly not representative of the majority of claimants as Cameron would have us believe), they are still getting the tab picked up by someone else - they don't care who it is, so long as it's not them. It just means that instead of the government paying, individual families will pay. It won't work the way he wants it to for one clear reason: there will have to be protection in place for those who have parents who simply won't keep them. They cannot insist on estrangement being the case like they can in cases of means tested benefits for 17 year olds, because at the age of 18 a person is no longer under the age of legal responsibility and their parents are not obliged to provide a home for them. They may however ask for confirmation that the parents won't house them, so what will happen? I imagine lots and lots of parents will confirm that they are not prepared to house their adult children and the government will not really save that much at all. It will cost more money to implement and administer this stupidity than it will save, that's my opinion.

When you come itnto the benefits, HMRC and minimum wage forum, scroll down a little and Click on the button that says 'post new thread'

Hope your mum gets the response she deserves, and i don't blame you for being angry - I'd be fuming if it were a relative of mine too. You go get 'em!

That will depend on whether at that time she has the right to reside and is habitually resident in the UK. These tests are complex and I suggest she sees a welfare rights representative about them. There is some information here about it.

Just to add what happens in DLA is when a person is reported as dead, in case you are worried. As far as I know, when it is reported that the claimant has died, the claim is suspended until they receive a verifiable date of death such as a death certificate or a BD8 (England/Wales) or 3344SI (Scotland) notification of death form is received. The claim is not usually closed/archived until they receive verification of the date of death, it's just suspended so that no further payment is made. I don't know however what they would do in circumstances where a verified date was not forthcoming - perhaps then they may close the claim, after a certain period has passed? So she will should be able to get her money, if you query it in good time which I know isn't the point - the point is that she is being labelled deceased when she isn't and that is very upsetting, particularly so soon after her husband's death. I just wanted to give you a little reassurance that her money should be ok. I hope your mum gets something out of this, it's horrible particularly as it's occurred more than once. I'd demand an explanation of how it happened and what they will do to ensure that it doesn't happen again. If they couldn't find a reason the first time by checking the usual common errors, they should have investigated it more thouroughly to get to the bottom of it. Fair enough DLA usually only suspends payment - but I'm assuming Barclays don't know that and what if they had closed the claim? It's serious enough to report someone as dead when they are not on two occasions but I would highlight to them that this could potentially cause some serious problems in regard to accessing her funds if DLA closed her claim - which as I've said shouldn't happen but may happen if not queried in good time, presumably.

This thread has been edited. As a reminder to all, those of you who have not read the forum rules, please ensure you do so before posting further on the forums. Hi Wafflefaffle. Mrs Foot and Jabbajones have both given you some advice which is spot on, some of the most inportant aspects of which I will echo. You do not have to go to court unless ordered to do so by the court. A person is also under no obligation to assist the authorities and it is possible to give a 'no comment' interview. However if you do this and as in your case no longer have a connection to the accused, the FIS and the prosecuting authority (if it is referred for prosecution) can make inferences, and they may be adverse. Any reasonable investigator or prosecutor would ask the question "Why is this person who no longer has a connection to the accused and nothing to lose from answering the questions, giving 'no comment' responses?" They then start questioning whether you are protecting the accused, or protecting your own interests and that ultimatley leads to the question of whether you aided, abetted or counselled or procuered commision of the fraud. Yes, they have to prove it, but they wouldn't be poking around looking for proof in the first place in a witnesses business (which is what you are, a witness) unless a witness gives them reason to. To that end, you did absolutely the right thing here; you protected yourself and quite rightly so too. Why put yourself at potential risk to protect someone to whom you owe no responsibility? I echo the sentiments of LaughingGirl and assisted blonde. He and he alone did this, not you. To add to JabbaJones posting, CAG has not and never will condone benefit fraud. Let me make it abundantly clear: anyone on this forum who is seen to be promoting benefit fraud or advice in evading detection will be given a warning. Further instances will result in an account restriction. Never mind the fraud investigators, it's me you've got to watch out for if I catch you promoting it. Little bit of lightheartedness there, but I really do mean it and cannot stress enough. CAG is here to help those get what they are legally entitled to; we are not here to promote illegal activity. To assist fraudsters in their offences would make a mockery of all those on here who have to fight to get what is rightfully theirs. There is no grey area (and certainly not 50 shades of it ), it's really that simple. That isn't to say people who commit fraud won't get our help. We will help them, just not to commit or cover up their crime. We will provide advice to members who are going through investigations as follows: in regard to what they can expect in general mitigating cirumcstances sentencing to have an independent calculation of the overpayment done If we believe from the post that no fraud has been committed we will advise of why we believe this is and what to do next - i.e what evidence to produce In all cases where it seems likely a criminal prosecution is inevitable, we will advise the member to seek legal advice - there is no substitute for a criminal defence solicitor in criminal proceedings. Wherever possible, seek a solicitor with knowledge and experience of welfare law.

Hi Juliette. Has your single person benefit been stopped?

Hi house3, I've seen the letters issued by DWP to GP's in these circumstances. They don't 'warn' GP's not to issue fit notes. They are simply advisory and tell the GP that you have been deemed as no having limited capability for work following an assessment and because of this, the GP no longer needs to provide fit notes. However, the letter is very clear and goes on to say that they can be issued if you appeal or if you are claiming for a new condition or a deterioration of your current condition. I think your GP has got the wrong end of the stick here. If you are not getting anywhere with your own GP, is there another GP perhaps that you could ask to see?

When you say they never reconsidered you, do you mean they did not revise the decision in your favour or they did not reconsider it at all? If it's that they never reconsidered he decision at all, can you tell us when you applied for reconsideration? Being pregnant is no barrier to receiving a sanction but regardless I don't think you should have been sanctioned in the first place without being given the opportunity to put across your points. A sanction should not affect payment of housing benefit because a sanction does not terminate the claim, it only stops payment of it so it shouldn't send a notification. You can still claim housing benefit - please contact the local council and ask them to reinstate (and backdate) your housing benefit. If there is another reason your housing benefit has been stopped, please tell us what this is so that we can help you with that as well.

Sorted! Council have been able to verify that I was not at the property on the dates I said I wasn't, from information held on another IT system. I only have to pay half the CT for the year I actually lived there. Phew!

Got someone who is going to look into this for me. Will post up any results.

I moved from there to another property for two months, then I moved here. I've been registered here for council tax for 8 years. I've paid that and paid arrears on a former property, hell I've even had a refund for over paying bloody council tax, and never had a bill or reminder for the address they are pursuing. We never got a bill or reminders for council tax at the previous address, but the landlord said he kept the council tax in his name but that he had included it in our rent so we weren't worried when we didn't get a bill. We got (or rather ex did as it was his tenancy) utility bills and other mail but never a council tax bill. I'd have had my ex raise it with the landlord if we did because that was why we paid over value for the property because the CT was supposed to be included in what we paid in rent. That's what I'm so annoyed about, the fact that this is the first time I'm hearing about this and for some of the years I didn't even live there. It's nuts that the council can just hand over your name to a sheriff and they will grant a warrant!