Find solution
Am I allowed to supplement my NYS U.I. benefit?

Incapacity Benefit V's Employment Support Allowance. Not allowed to have savings!?

  • Hi there, Incapacity Benefit V's Employment Support Allowance... Incapacity Benefit is a Non-Means Tested Benefit which means one can have savings and it won't affect their Benefit yet when migrated onto Employment Support Allowance it is unfair for those with savings as if you are put into the Income Based E.S.A and not Contributions Based E.S.A you are not allowed savings above £6,000.00 before it starts being affected. How is this fair? Lin. x

  • Answer:

    Hi again Lin, I agree with some of the changes, even though my partner is now on ESA after claiming incap. If you can afford THAT much in savings, then you can afford to live off them and the interest. It's time people realised, benefits are there for the most needy, not a lifestyle choice. I cannot even save £5 a month, as it ALL goes on bills and expenses. HOW in HELL could I save £6,000!?? Incapacity left too many people unchecked with thousands sitting in the bank. It's not right and it does a disservice to genuine people. Almost EVERY other benefit is means testes, accept DLA because you can work while getting that. So why should ESA be ANY different? ALL other benefits are means tested/income based, so I don't have a problem with ESA being one of them. Even Carers Allowance is. It is NOT right, that people claim state money for years and years and years while sat on a nice next egg! No wonder people are better off on benefits and living single! The saying of "the benefits trap" is true! I don't agree with Cameron making all claimants evil scroungers, but as someone who has gone through the benefits system, it MUST change! I agree, that ESA should fall in line with other benefits.

PeggyLuX... at Yahoo! Answers Visit the source

Was this solution helpful to you?

Other answers

Life isnt fair full stop. Nobody ever said it would be. It is written nowhere that things should be fair. If you have savings that is great but you should be using them to help keep you. Many people who work hard for a low to middling income do not have savings because they cannot afford to save. Any money they may have been able to squirrel away is taken from them in taxes to provide 'benefits' for those who need help. That help should be no more than the very minimum to help out and not be providing a better 'income' than working for a living would. The greater unfairness at the moment and for many years past has been the amount paid out to those who do not contribute all provided by those who work hard and have little to show for it over and above their self pride in not living off the backs of others. Anyone can need a bit of help now and then but there are those who expect others to pay for them from birth to funeral and that is really taking the p***

Margaret S

Benefits are not intended to be fair. They are intended to help people going thru a bad patch when they are unemployed. Some people never earn enought to build up savings and need help. Most of us do not mind helping those people. Others do earn enough to save a bit for a rainy day and they are responsible enough to do so. Others do earn enough to save but do not bother. They just spend every penny they earn and the responsible ones have to go without to support them. That is the bit that isn't fair.

DR + Mrs Bears face

It's not at all fair, the government want to penalise the most vulnerable in society...none of them have any compassion..oh and while I am here- the N.H.S...don't get me started.

Lily B Talus

It might not seam to be fair but the welfare system in the UK was designed to provide a safety net for people not to starve or freeze to death, hence for people that can afford to look after themselves then they should do and the country will help out those that can't.... that is the idea. Now the level where the government decides that the individual needs help is up for debate I agree. Certainly a person with a million in the bank should be able to take care of themselves, a person with 1p in the bank probably can't. So a level is set and with levels there will always be people who complain when they go to the unfavourable side of it (same with tax levels). £6k is about right - it is enough to pay for emergencies (such as broken kitchen appliances and so on) but certainly not enough to afford luxuries (such as foreign holidays, new cars, big TV sets and so on - or for the sensible it shouldn't be), so the person has their own safety net available to them. Now of course, the government forgets that the sensible among us do save cash and it is very frustrating to have to withdraw from savings every week in the case of redundancy or sickness. And of course you don't just not get anything with savings but the amount decreases in proportion to the amount of savings

Road Race Stats

o

Stringer Bell

Related Q & A:

Just Added Q & A:

Find solution

For every problem there is a solution! Proved by Solucija.

  • Got an issue and looking for advice?

  • Ask Solucija to search every corner of the Web for help.

  • Get workable solutions and helpful tips in a moment.

Just ask Solucija about an issue you face and immediately get a list of ready solutions, answers and tips from other Internet users. We always provide the most suitable and complete answer to your question at the top, along with a few good alternatives below.