Benefit sanctions evidence

[Ms Macbeth 75]

I signed on for the first time over a year ago. I had worked for over 20 years and was made surpless to requirements. Not fully understanding the rules I made a simple mistake and was sanctioned for 3 months( still had to sign on during that). I was livid and tried to appeal, speak to someone etc. My Job centre mentor was rude, unhelpful and spoke to me like I was stupid. In the end I decided to go self employed as I would've probably lost it completely having to sign on and turn up for stupid DWP interviews. They were on my case as soon as I signed on. I could understand the need to get me motivated if I'd been signing on 10 years but this was 3 weeks. I've paid my stamp and should be entitled to some of it back. I have 3 kids, bills, mortgage etc and no JSA. If I hadn't had any savings, I've no idea what I would've done. I didn't qualify for an emergency loan or for them to reconsider the sanction. They refused point blank.I wouldn't wish this experience on my worst enemy. At the moment there is a case in court demanding the number of deaths to be revealed under benefit sanctions using the freedom of information act. The DWP are fighting this tooth and nail.

 

Weren't you entitled to 6 months contribution based JSA? I thought that's what anyone who paid their NI over a long period got when they become unemployed. Can that be sanctioned like means tested benefits?

 

Not impressed by the way you were treated though. Sadly some public sector employees appear incapable of treating people as individuals, a bit like 'the computer says no'.

[Anna B 1,414]

until the people on here experience signing on they can talk as much bullcrap as they like. what gets me here is look how the greeks/French etc kick up when they don't agree with the government and what do we do roll over and let the gov do what they want . the last time we kicked off(poll tax )the gov sooned changed their tune. wheres the british fight gone from the people?

 

I agree. And Sheffielders in particular used to have a proud history of standing up for themselves, as exemplified by the plaque in the peace gardens to the Chartists. Now, all the fight seems to have gone out of people, and we get the governments we deserve...

 

---------- Post added 15-07-2015 at 04:03 ----------

 

Save and invest your money when you are working, then you have no reason to resort to signing on when in between jobs. Too many people spend their money on expensive foreign holidays and subscription TV and then complain about having no money when things go bad. I for one have no sympathy.

 

It's quite clear that you have no sympathy - or empathy.

 

Foreign holidays and subscription TV?

Did it ever occur to you, that some poorly paid working people have a hard enough time simply putting food on the table and paying all the bills, that there is simply no money left over for savings?

 

No... I didn't think so.

[unbeliever 10]

 

It's quite clear that you have no sympathy - or empathy.

 

Foreign holidays and subscription TV?

Did it ever occur to you, that some poorly paid working people have a hard enough time simply putting food on the table and paying all the bills, that there is simply no money left over for savings?

 

No... I didn't think so.

 

Did you read post 171?

Have we missed something?

 

I would never support a system which left people, no matter what poor decisions they'd made, being left to starve or having nowhere safe and warm to sleep.

On the other hand, why should we bail out somebody at risk of losing things they value because of their own mismanagement (e.g. not putting money aside for a rainy day) ?

My research indicates that benefits are more than adequate to support those who have fallen on hard times, but that doesn't mean that they're not going to lose out. Of course they are. They may lose ownership of a house, or a car, or a TV. That's not society's fault and state charity doesn't need extend to non-essentials.

 

If you're so concerned, you're free to offer your own money to individuals through the voluntary sector. State mandated charity should only go so far. All the evidence is that state charity is already extremely generous.

 

P.S. Anna, perhaps you'd like to go onto entitledto.co.uk and see if you can come up with a reasonable scenario in which one might become genuinely impoverished.

Edited July 15, 2015 by unbeliever

[Mister M 1,625]

Save and invest your money when you are working, then you have no reason to resort to signing on when in between jobs. Too many people spend their money on expensive foreign holidays and subscription TV and then complain about having no money when things go bad. I for one have no sympathy.

 

You do surprise me HH. Given that your posts are normally overflowing with the milk of human kindness

[unbeliever 10]

You do surprise me HH. Given that your posts are normally overflowing with the milk of human kindness

 

It's all very well yourself and Anna B, advocating handing out yet more free money to those who haven't earned it, taken from those who did?

How far would you go? Is there any amount of tax-payer generosity that would be adequate?

Should the state simply hand over to anybody who asks what they say they need?

Would a single mistake by the state managers of benefits indicate that the whole system is a catastrophe?

Is there no room at all for personal responsibility in your ideal society?

[ricgem2002 11]

It's all very well yourself and Anna B, advocating handing out yet more free money to those who haven't earned it, taken from those who did?

QUOTE]

does this include the government :hihi:

[craigmason 10]

https://jobseekersanctionadvice.com/

benefit sanctions are unfair and cause death's

http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/one-in-five-benefit-related-deaths-involved-sanctions-admits-dwp/

https://www.change.org/p/hm-courts-and-tribunal-service-publish-stats-showing-how-many-people-have-died-after-their-benefits-stopped

Edited July 15, 2015 by craigmason

[poppet2 13]

It's all very well yourself and Anna B, advocating handing out yet more free money to those who haven't earned it, taken from those who did?

How far would you go? Is there any amount of tax-payer generosity that would be adequate?

Should the state simply hand over to anybody who asks what they say they need?

Would a single mistake by the state managers of benefits indicate that the whole system is a catastrophe?

Is there no room at all for personal responsibility in your ideal society?

 

This sounds similar to aid the government freely gives to third world leaders oops, people.

[Chris_Sleeps 10]

Save and invest your money when you are working, then you have no reason to resort to signing on when in between jobs.

Will they reduce my NI contributions if I do? No. Thus if someone has contributed for a benefit, then they should be entitled to claim it.

Weren't you entitled to 6 months contribution based JSA? I thought that's what anyone who paid their NI over a long period got when they become unemployed. Can that be sanctioned like means tested benefits?

You're correct - Cb-JSA is awarded for 6 months and the benefit can still be sanctioned.

[truman 10]

Will they reduce my NI contributions if I do? No. Thus if someone has contributed for a benefit, then they should be entitled to claim it.

 

.

 

What about people who have never contributed?

[Chris_Sleeps 10]

They wouldn't claim Contribution-based JSA. That would be Income-based, or means tested.

 

If these people are young and want to work, and just haven't had the opportunity then there is no shame on them. I signed on briefly when I was 19, for about 4 months. It wasn't fun but I managed to find some work for 6 months. When that ended I signed on for a month before I went back into education. Life on the dole taught me value of working hard.

 

For some people - long term malingerer-unemployed, for they do exist, they will never have worked. How to get these people into work - carrot or stick? That is the question. However benefit sanctions catch all people, not just this group of people. The benefits system should not exist to punish people, and DWP should not set out with the aim of searching for people to punish for the most minor indescretions.