Signing on as unemployed

Hi, Would there be any point in signing-on as unemployed for someone
who currently has no work and was previously self-employed for years
AND who has a well-paid partner at home? I'm sure that he wouldn't be
entitled to any JSA or IS but is there any other benefit, financial or
otherwise (apart from job-seeking advice), he might be entitled to? TIA

Sean wrote:
> Hi, Would there be any point in signing-on as unemployed for someone
> who currently has no work and was previously self-employed for years
> AND who has a well-paid partner at home? I'm sure that he wouldn't be
> entitled to any JSA or IS but is there any other benefit, financial or
> otherwise (apart from job-seeking advice), he might be entitled to? TIA
>

In practical terms, very little point at all. You wouldn't qualify for
IS anyway and it is unlikely that there will be any entitlement to the
means tested element of JSA (perhaps this is what you were thinking of
when you mention IS, it changed back in 1996) and in the circumstances,
contributions based JSA either.

The only gains:

you may be able to sign on and get NI credits

if you have any insurance cover (eg on loans) that require proof of
unemployment to pay out then it may be worthwhile

If you decide to work for an employer in the future you can provide some
sort of documentary proof of being unemployed for this period

You'd need to go through the whole form filling and interview process
though, as well as showing you are available for and actively seeking
work etc.
--
Robbie

Robbie wrote:

> The only gains:
>
> you may be able to sign on and get NI credits

and NI credits will count towards your State Pension.

--
Facts are sacred ... but comment is free

"Robbie" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Sean wrote:
>> Hi, Would there be any point in signing-on as unemployed for someone who
>> currently has no work and was previously self-employed for years AND who
>> has a well-paid partner at home? I'm sure that he wouldn't be entitled
>> to any JSA or IS but is there any other benefit, financial or otherwise
>> (apart from job-seeking advice), he might be entitled to? TIA
>>
>
> In practical terms, very little point at all. You wouldn't qualify for IS
> anyway and it is unlikely that there will be any entitlement to the means
> tested element of JSA (perhaps this is what you were thinking of when you
> mention IS, it changed back in 1996) and in the circumstances,
> contributions based JSA either.
>
> The only gains:
>
> you may be able to sign on and get NI credits
>
> if you have any insurance cover (eg on loans) that require proof of
> unemployment to pay out then it may be worthwhile
>
> If you decide to work for an employer in the future you can provide some
> sort of documentary proof of being unemployed for this period
>
> You'd need to go through the whole form filling and interview process
> though, as well as showing you are available for and actively seeking work
> etc.
> --
> Robbie


I would have thought he is entitled to JSA for 6 months if he paid tax, that
is the very least I would expect.

In article <>,
says...
>
>
>
>"Robbie" <> wrote in message
>news:...
>> Sean wrote:
>>> Hi, Would there be any point in signing-on as unemployed for someone who
>>> currently has no work and was previously self-employed for years AND who
>>> has a well-paid partner at home? I'm sure that he wouldn't be entitled
>>> to any JSA or IS but is there any other benefit, financial or otherwise
>>> (apart from job-seeking advice), he might be entitled to? TIA
>>>
>>
>> In practical terms, very little point at all. You wouldn't qualify for IS
>> anyway and it is unlikely that there will be any entitlement to the means
>> tested element of JSA (perhaps this is what you were thinking of when you
>> mention IS, it changed back in 1996) and in the circumstances,
>> contributions based JSA either.
>>
>> The only gains:
>>
>> you may be able to sign on and get NI credits
>>
>> if you have any insurance cover (eg on loans) that require proof of
>> unemployment to pay out then it may be worthwhile
>>
>> If you decide to work for an employer in the future you can provide some
>> sort of documentary proof of being unemployed for this period
>>
>> You'd need to go through the whole form filling and interview process
>> though, as well as showing you are available for and actively seeking work
>> etc.
>> --
>> Robbie
>
>
>I would have thought he is entitled to JSA for 6 months if he paid tax, that
>is the very least I would expect.

Thanks for the advice and comments, guys. It confirms what I feared to be
the case. As to Niteawk's comments, I see his uninformed and misleading
contribution is still up to his usual standards.

"Sean" <> wrote in message
news:20100305-...
> In article <>,
>
> says...
>>
>>
>>
>>"Robbie" <> wrote in message
>>news:...
>>> Sean wrote:
>>>> Hi, Would there be any point in signing-on as unemployed for someone
>>>> who
>>>> currently has no work and was previously self-employed for years AND
>>>> who
>>>> has a well-paid partner at home? I'm sure that he wouldn't be entitled
>>>> to any JSA or IS but is there any other benefit, financial or otherwise
>>>> (apart from job-seeking advice), he might be entitled to? TIA
>>>>
>>>
>>> In practical terms, very little point at all. You wouldn't qualify for
>>> IS
>>> anyway and it is unlikely that there will be any entitlement to the
>>> means
>>> tested element of JSA (perhaps this is what you were thinking of when
>>> you
>>> mention IS, it changed back in 1996) and in the circumstances,
>>> contributions based JSA either.
>>>
>>> The only gains:
>>>
>>> you may be able to sign on and get NI credits
>>>
>>> if you have any insurance cover (eg on loans) that require proof of
>>> unemployment to pay out then it may be worthwhile
>>>
>>> If you decide to work for an employer in the future you can provide some
>>> sort of documentary proof of being unemployed for this period
>>>
>>> You'd need to go through the whole form filling and interview process
>>> though, as well as showing you are available for and actively seeking
>>> work
>>> etc.
>>> --
>>> Robbie
>>
>>
>>I would have thought he is entitled to JSA for 6 months if he paid tax,
>>that
>>is the very least I would expect.
>
> Thanks for the advice and comments, guys. It confirms what I feared to be
> the case. As to Niteawk's comments, I see his uninformed and misleading
> contribution is still up to his usual standards.
>
>

Pity you dont read to well, depending on income and savings, he might
qualify for income based JSA.

On 6 Mar, 01:42, "Niteawk" <nos...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> "Sean" <s...@home.co.uk> wrote in message
>
> news:20100305-...
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article <Zuidncognu5Y0wzWnZ2dnUVZ8nydn...@bt.com>,
> > nos...@btinternet.com
> > says...
>
> >>"Robbie" <ngrobbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:...
> >>> Sean wrote:
> >>>> Hi, Would there be any point in signing-on as unemployed for someone
> >>>> who
> >>>> currently has no work and was previously self-employed for years AND
> >>>> who
> >>>> has a well-paid partner at home? *I'm sure that he wouldn't be entitled
> >>>> to any JSA or IS but is there any other benefit, financial or otherwise
> >>>> (apart from job-seeking advice), he might be entitled to? TIA
>
> >>> In practical terms, very little point at all. You wouldn't qualify for
> >>> IS
> >>> anyway and it is unlikely that there will be any entitlement to the
> >>> means
> >>> tested element of JSA (perhaps this is what you were thinking of when
> >>> you
> >>> mention IS, it changed back in 1996) and in the circumstances,
> >>> contributions based JSA either.
>
> >>> The only gains:
>
> >>> you may be able to sign on and get NI credits
>
> >>> if you have any insurance cover (eg on loans) that require proof of
> >>> unemployment to pay out then it may be worthwhile
>
> >>> If you decide to work for an employer in the future you can provide some
> >>> sort of documentary proof of being unemployed for this period
>
> >>> You'd need to go through the whole form filling and interview process
> >>> though, as well as showing you are available for and actively seeking
> >>> work
> >>> etc.
> >>> --
> >>> Robbie
>
> >>I would have thought he is entitled to JSA for 6 months if he paid tax,
> >>that
> >>is the very least I would expect.
>
> > Thanks for the advice and comments, guys. It confirms what I feared to be
> > the case. As to Niteawk's comments, I see his uninformed and misleading
> > contribution is still up to his usual standards.
>
> Pity you dont read to well, *depending on income and savings, he might
> qualify for income based JSA.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

With a well paid partner at home?
Read up on what income is used for income based JSA before you offer
advice.

Martin <><

In article <F->,
says...
>
>

>
>Pity you dont read to well, depending on income and savings, he might
>qualify for income based JSA.

No, it's a pity you don't read what I said. As Martin has pointed out to
you, I deliberately mentioned his 'well-paid partner'. Because of this he
doesn't qualify for the means-tested JSA.

>I would have thought he is entitled to JSA for 6 months if he paid tax,
>that is the very least I would expect.

The fact that he paid income tax when working as self-employed doesn't
entitle him to the non-means tested JSA either.

<> wrote in message
news:74fbe05f-9da5-4a2a-94b9-...
On 6 Mar, 01:42, "Niteawk" <nos...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> "Sean" <s...@home.co.uk> wrote in message
>
> news:20100305-...
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article <Zuidncognu5Y0wzWnZ2dnUVZ8nydn...@bt.com>,
> > nos...@btinternet.com
> > says...
>
> >>"Robbie" <ngrobbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:...
> >>> Sean wrote:
> >>>> Hi, Would there be any point in signing-on as unemployed for someone
> >>>> who
> >>>> currently has no work and was previously self-employed for years AND
> >>>> who
> >>>> has a well-paid partner at home? I'm sure that he wouldn't be
> >>>> entitled
> >>>> to any JSA or IS but is there any other benefit, financial or
> >>>> otherwise
> >>>> (apart from job-seeking advice), he might be entitled to? TIA
>
> >>> In practical terms, very little point at all. You wouldn't qualify for
> >>> IS
> >>> anyway and it is unlikely that there will be any entitlement to the
> >>> means
> >>> tested element of JSA (perhaps this is what you were thinking of when
> >>> you
> >>> mention IS, it changed back in 1996) and in the circumstances,
> >>> contributions based JSA either.
>
> >>> The only gains:
>
> >>> you may be able to sign on and get NI credits
>
> >>> if you have any insurance cover (eg on loans) that require proof of
> >>> unemployment to pay out then it may be worthwhile
>
> >>> If you decide to work for an employer in the future you can provide
> >>> some
> >>> sort of documentary proof of being unemployed for this period
>
> >>> You'd need to go through the whole form filling and interview process
> >>> though, as well as showing you are available for and actively seeking
> >>> work
> >>> etc.
> >>> --
> >>> Robbie
>
> >>I would have thought he is entitled to JSA for 6 months if he paid tax,
> >>that
> >>is the very least I would expect.
>
> > Thanks for the advice and comments, guys. It confirms what I feared to
> > be
> > the case. As to Niteawk's comments, I see his uninformed and misleading
> > contribution is still up to his usual standards.
>
> Pity you dont read to well, depending on income and savings, he might
> qualify for income based JSA.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

With a well paid partner at home?
Read up on what income is used for income based JSA before you offer
advice.

Martin <><

Means nothing, what a wife does with her money is her business, there is no
law that says she has to support or give money to her husband. Situations
like that tend to lead to divorce.

"Sean" <> wrote in message
news:20100306-...
> In article <F->,
>
> says...
>>
>>
>
>>
>>Pity you dont read to well, depending on income and savings, he might
>>qualify for income based JSA.
>
> No, it's a pity you don't read what I said. As Martin has pointed out to
> you, I deliberately mentioned his 'well-paid partner'. Because of this he
> doesn't qualify for the means-tested JSA.
>
>>I would have thought he is entitled to JSA for 6 months if he paid tax,
>>that is the very least I would expect.
>
> The fact that he paid income tax when working as self-employed doesn't
> entitle him to the non-means tested JSA either.
>

Even if he had no money to live on?