Tony F Dordogne
-
Posts
2,369 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Tony F Dordogne
-
-
The information you were given about exporting all your benefits before leaving the UK was incorrect because HMG was still using theirEuro-illegal legislation to take people off DLA when they moved to other EU countries. As you were given that information before you left, did youappeal against the decision to terminate your benefit?
I'm not in a position to advise you on any other benefits that you should be getting from the UK, the main question if have you reveived any benefits here in France because if you hav e, you wont be entitled to any UK benefits because France is your competant state.
Also, how old are you and do you still receive IB and are you using an E121 provided by the long-term IB.
And the next question is have you applied for reinstatement?
The fact that you left the Uk in January 2007 means that you left the UK after HMG were informed of the case being taken to the ECJ (May 2005) but before the ECJ made it's judgement against HMG (October 2007) so that means, according to their rules and our submission, that your case should have been held in abeyance pending the ECJ judgement, that's part of the judgement we're waiting for now.
Obviously, if you haven't asked for reinstatement, there's no way the DWP will be able to reinstate you. So you need to get in touch with the ExpoTeam to ask them for the appropriate forms and tell them you're not a new claimant, you're seeking reinstatement. You need to ring the ExpoTeam on 0044 1253 337 231.
But, the backdating may cause you a problem. We're still unclear how far back backdating will take place tho we think we know. Therefore, they may decide that because you're a very late application, you wont get the backdate at all.
And from what I've heard from the DWP they're not giving away how they will deal with very late applications for reinstatement. People leaving the Uk now are exporting their benefit with them but with you, you'll need to apply and see.
-
I caught the end of the F1 yesterday having spent a couple of hours on election duty which was, on balance, much more interesting than the F1.
Overindulged, overadvertised, overpaid people commenting on other overpaid and overadvertised people driving a car round and round in complex patterns.
Boring beyond belief like all the Facebook sites about F1 and whose widget is bigger, smaller, slicker, more legal/illegal than the other company's.
-
Miznoma, you have been seriously mis-informed (by friends?) and it sounds as tho the advice you've received is from people who are not in this situation and this has been covered on here so many times, searching the archives and stickies would have helped you enormously.
I am 100% because of a serious blood condition with several associated conditions caused by the blood condition. My 100% is on the list of 30 MLD. No 31on the list is for any long term condition that your GP can persuade CPAM should be covered but some are not and are never covered.
What Cathy says is absolutely correct. I have a mutuelle for my other health needs - dental, those not covered by my 100% or the state 70% cover and every year the premium increases 'naturally' and then there are age triggers. I was not asked about my health prior to taking out the mutuelle. I researched this extensively before taking out the mutuelle and NONE that I found give any reduction for being retired or for having MLD, tho it is possible to have reduced cover if the 100% still covers all your other health needs, you just don't get as much reimbursed. But then you pick up the bill, as you were asked to do at the hospital for the shortfall and no, the number isn't picked out the air, it's the price that they charge and pass on to you.
You have chosen not to have a mutuelle, for whatever reason, and because of that you get the bill, that's the system here and that's the result of your decision. And because you haven't persuaded your GP to have you're husband designated as 100%, you're stuck really.
I suppose tho that he's on an E121 and you're his dependant?
-
If it's too cold to pee onto the compost heap, it's too cold for sure to stick your bum on the ground - would be interesting trying to explain to the Pompiers why you're a**e is stuck to the ground - honestly Jean-Pierre, I read about it on the Internet, old English tradition - yeah, right, round the commune grapevine in 10 minutes that one!
-
We did some gardening last weekend - mainly cutting down old large grasses and digging up stuff to move, but currently we're colded off, very frosty overnight and far too cold during the day, the ground is still hard in the afternoon and far too cold for seeds and stuff except in a heated greenhouse I think.
-
HMG, though the Ministerial statement, have said:
"To benefit from this change,(claimants having their reinstatement carried through) people must have moved abroad no earlier than 8 March 2001. This is the date of the ECJ judgement in the case C-215/99 Jauch v Pensionsversicherungsanstalt der Arbeiter."
This isn't an arbitrary date/case, it's something that was - broadly - accepted by the lawyers from all sides at the test case and seems to be a tipping point for HMG.
However, that does leave the people who moved to the EU/Switzerland post 1992 and before March 2001 somewhat in limbo and they will need to pursue HMG through the tribunal process. Interestingly, the work Dragon Rouge and some of the campaigners did last summer for our legal fall-back position concentrated on the issues and misapplication of the 1992 law in relation to the 2007 ECJ judgement and we felt we had a strong case back to 1992 so I'm hoping that claimants for the 1992/2001 period can tap in to the work we've already done if they wish to continue to fight.
My personal view is that for many of the post-2001 movers, once their cases are settled, the fire will go out of the campaign but I think we should continue to fight and suppost for the interregnum group - we'll see what happens.
I spoke to the manager at the Tribunal Office yesterday to scarify a couple of things. The test case/bundling argument is something of a red herring for the other 300 odd claimants. If the decision - which will be handed down by Friday or very early next week - goes against the two claimants in the test cases, they can go to the Upper Level Tribunal.
However, although many of the 300 plus claimants asked not to be bundled and to fight our own cases, if the decision goes against the claimants, we have to take all our cases to the Lower Level Tribunal and start the whole process again, the decisions only apply to the two cases heard last week tho the DWP have said they will apply that decision across the board.
The good thing is that the movement already made by HMG and their decision to accept all claims for reinstatement back to the ECJ decision of 2007 means that effectively, save a liitle more admin, everybody is being reinstated and will start to get their benefit again, it's the period before the ECJ judgement of 2007 that remains in dispute.
Hope this helps.
-
Most of the above is correct BUT ..........
Long term incapacity benefit means you get an E121 is correct.
An E121 by reason of IB means you get 100% is incorrect.
The E121 for inactifs (under retirement age) with an E121 entitles you to the usual state reimburesments up to 70% the rest of which is made up with a mutuelle.
To get the 100% you need to have been signed off as needing that by your GP in France and CPAM accepting that.
IB remains a qualifying benefit for people wanting to claim DLA but the smart money is to claim DLA in the UK, DO NOT LEAVE IT UNTIL YOU GET TO FRANCE because it is now very clear that the DWP WILL be able to use the 26 week rule (past presence test) for people making new claims (rather than claims for reinstatement) after being in France for more than 26 weeks. If you try to use a UK accomodation address you WILL be found out because you will be registered with a GP in France and you'll be on the E121 - simples!
The new benefit system is already in place and GB citizens on IB across the EU are getting forms asking them to have their host country GP certify that their condition has not changed and they are making it clear that even if you have been signed off work for life (old form IB5 I think) you are still subject to review now tho how they will apply that to people in Europe after the form is completed has yet to be seen. But what Cooperlola says is correct, if your IB is subsequently withdrawn you WILL loose your entitlement to the E121 cover and if you have an ongoing condition, you will find that obtaining a 100% mutuelle which you legally need as an inactif will be virtually impossible.
The rule now with the changes in both French and British legislation is that making any assumptions and asking for guarantees from HMG at such a time of change would be very foolish and they are now making changes retrospective so what is 'safe' today may not be so 'safe' tomorrow.
Hope this helps and clarifies things.
-
I watched it too, just to see if it had improved after the last series. Generating lots of discussion on the Uk gardening fora and the concensus seems to be that it's a sort of gardening 101, ok for new gardeners but there's nothing for any experienced gardeners around now.
And as for standing out in falling snow talking about snowdrops, well each to their own but seems like a seriously minority sport that one, like the garden gnome guy in the last series.
Carol Klein and Monty Don or the guy from Harlow Carr Gardens for me, Alys is as patronising as Toby, yes I do know know to grow tomatoes (he should have mentioned that thre seeds are F1s which would mean something to some of us who don't want to use F1s) from seed and how to sow sweet peas - interesting that she didn't mention nicking the cases or soaking them first so ease germination, still, bit advanced that I suppose.
I'll give it a whirl on Friday but if it's not a bit more grown up, that's me out too.
-
Hi folks
Well, the Tribunal sat yesterday and the DWP/HMG threw everything at it. A barrister, 6 solicitors and a range of DWP/ExpoTeam staff arrived from HMG side and they ripped into the claimant and made him feel like a criminal on trial which the Tribunals are not supposed to do. Shame on the Judges for letting it go that far.
There is an offer on the table but it means claimants would give up their right to payment for the period between leaving the Uk/moving to Europe and the ECJ judgement, with a one off payment from HMG for the period from the ECJ judgement to the date they claimed reinstatement. Two chances of people accepting that, the best of which is no chance.
The decision will be handed down next month and if necessary we're all looking forward to a visit to the Upper Tribunal for the appeal if necessary - and then if it's the same decision there, we have a plan C which we've been working on all year quietly in the background.
The MP who has been leading on this has called on HMG to make payments to all the claimants immediately or at least to reinstste their benefit from now because HMG are accepting that from the date of the ECJ decision - and possibly from a previous decision in 2001 - benefit is payable, so we wait to see what happens next.
To me DWP/HMG have made a huge strategic error because they've shown their whole hand now and the way they're fighting this is showing now how desperate they are becoming, the team they sent to the Tribunal was way ott, usually a sign of panic in any government department.
More updates as they become available.
BTW, thanks for the messages on here and in private. We're both fine and dandy actually, we're home, safe and sound and snug, the garden is getting some long overdue attention, our daughter is doing just fine and all is tickety boo as far as we know. And once this DLA thing is finally out the way - my battle on this has been running since October 2007 - we'll have nothing to do (as if!).
-
Heard a woodpecker yesterday and today we had a Red Admiral, a bumbling bee and what looked like a miner bee in the garden within 15 mins of each other - fringers crossed, it may be spring springing.
-
Think of the people in 'Strictly Come Dancing' and that equally appalling dancing on ice thing on ITV. Or Jordan. They're all that bizarre shade of orange because they have to have those spray tan things.
I'd go with the pale and interesting rather than the orange and chavvy.
-
Unfortunately I shalln't now be there. Having had all the turmoil; and upset surrounding the accident and 4 deaths locally, our daughter in law got her wish and finally managed to drink herself to death so much of this year has been tied up with that. Only arrived home from funeral and general fallout on Thursday and on Friday we had to have our lovely old cat put to sleep because he was so poorly.
Fed up with UK, HMG, travelling round and in London and worrying or thinking about other people so staying here for the forseeable, not going back to the UK for at least a year unless I absolutely have to!
Gardening to do, spring may have arrived a little and going to 'chill' as my grandson would say.
-
So, the ECJ judgement was in October 2007 and HMG finally got their criteria for reinstatement out in 2008 and have since steadfastly refused to see the arguments made by the people seeking reinstatement. The cases have been bundled together and slated as test cases for the Lower Tribunal on 3/4 March, next week.
And yesterday, HMG folded on one of their longstanding arguments about the past presence test, which the campaigners and their lawyers have been questioning since day 1 and which HMG continued to stick to after they lost the same argument at previous Upper Tribunals.
The cases are still to be heard to get rid of the second plank of HMG's impossible to meet rules but the change of heart (if they have one) will seriously undermine their stance.
So if they fold now, what has all the arguing, civil service time/money/legal fees been all about? And if nothing else, it supports the various complaints against HMG/DWP that have been lodged and made the liklihood of even greater payouts possible for maladministration.
The downside is that - thus far - HMG have said they'll only backdate to the date of ECJ ruling but that should be easy to overturn at the Tribunal because the date of award has already been held to be the date of original award, not October 2007.
But why have they continued to make this argument for so long? A rhetorical question of course, the answer is because they could and they did and they're pillocks of course.
-
[quote user="Billycourty"]I am Australian and in Australia yes i would be worried. [/quote]
Our small commune has social housing and so has every commune round here. The nearby largest town has a couple of 'estates' also and there's no problem with them.
Jay, being blunt and frank with you, if you're worried about that and your property values France, which as far as my experience goes, the great majority of people don't really have those sorts of hangups or issues especially in the small towns/villages except among Brits, the French tend not to get too stressed about their property values.
If that sort of thing really worries you so much, I'd be considering whether France is the place I want to be - but that's only my opinion.
-
Your friends really needs to check this out with Newcastle.
If she pays into the French system and qualifies for French benefits in any way or form, it is likely that France becomes her competant state and as such, her entitlement to cover from HMG could and should cease.
However, as Will has intimated, people can and do circumvent the system but if she gets caught - and the current information from HMG and claimants/recipients on E forms is increasingly difficult - both her and her nusband as the insured person, could find themselves in the mire. It's not only a case of her losing her cover, her husband is required to inform the issuing authority of any changes that may effect his dependants.
-
Yep, double whammy from Martyn and I!
I'll go look elsewhere then.
-
WB, sorry to be serious for a moment but have you come across a family called CASSANET, perhaps a Pierre Vincent C, maybe Visconte (maybe Marquis) de CASSANNETT, whilst you've been trawling though the Vendee Revolt?
He's supposed to have fled the Vendee for England after the rebels were put back in their box, where he was given a state pension by Pitt to maintain him - that's the family story anyway.
-
Tho the Moderators aren't necessarily the Adminsitrators and perhaps it's those more secretive rascals at Archant who have deleted them? Or pressed the wrong button - again!
-
No nounours, if you had read the other thread to which you have referred, the letter only SAYS pension, it is for people who have E121s etc for reason of illness or disability too.
-
Scooter, if you use the link in the message above, all is explained!
-
Guys, I received the letter today but let's not get all bent out of shape by this. Mine also says pension and I'm only 62. J has the same letter and that says pension also and she is over pensionable age.
My E121 is issued on grounds of disability/health and I've got the pension letter - so it's just another one size fits all letter for a number of different scenarios.
I'll make the phone call on Monday just to confirm all this but it's a waste of money call.
-
This has been explained several times in other thtreads but here goes again.
Competant in this context does not mean the English version of the word - the skills and ability to complete a task - but the French meaning - the responsibility for a task or duty.
So, the UK remains the competant state for those people in receipt of an E121 and their dependants because they are the country that issued the E121 and France as the host state charges the costs of treatment of E121 holders, whether issued for retirement or disability, back to the UK for the holder and their dependants. The UK also remains the the competant state for people with other E forms during the life of those E forms, then ceases to be the competant state until the next category kicks in.
So you have an E106 which then expires, the Uk has been your competant state for the life of the form. Then, if you are inactif, you have no competant state and are therefore a potential drain on the French State and therefore you now need private medical insurance. The Uk becomes the competant state again when it can issue the claimant with another E form, for example when the person reaches retirement age.
And that is the reason that people who are claiming benefit from the UK are being advised NOT to claim benefits from their new host country, once you do that you cut the tie with the UK and the country in which you now claim benefit is your competant state. However, if you are a UK citizen, the Uk becomes your competant state again when you hit retirement age.
And as soon as you pay into the French national insurance system because you're working, your UK competant state status is effectively suspended until retirement age.
This is a major issue in the DLA campaign and is something I'm leading on within the campaign.
Simples!
-
A good number of people involved in the DLA campaign have made complaints to the Independant Case Examiner (ICE) which is the statutory watchdog - rather like an Obmudsman - who looks at the processes by which the DWP make decisions, its administration etc.
Because of the forthcoming lead and test cases in London, the ICE has put all the complaints he has received on hold pending the outcome of the Tribunal. I phoned the ICE office yesterday and was told that the reason for the suspension is that the ICE wants to know the outcome of the lead cases so he can determine whether those decisions will influence his findings specifically, if the DWP loose, will there be an additional amount added to the financial compensation that the ICE would award.
They are still unsure whether the ICE decision will be held over in the event of appeals to the Upper Tribunal and even the Supreme Court.
So the applications for reinstatement are delayed, the ICE decision is delayed and the claims for maladministration are delayed. Surely it would have been easier and quicker all round just to pay the benefit to the small number of people claiming reinstatement than HMG spending all this time and money fighting everything.
To put it into perspective, an FOI request shows that there are 3,096,390 people in the UK receiving DLA. The other questions posed - not by me I hasten to add - about the country of origin of those claimants (how many are UK citizens, how many are from the EU, how many were from outside the EU, even how many Brits left the UK before October 2007 whilst claiming DLA) were not answered because HMG either doesn't keep the information in that form or it would be too difficult/expensive to obtain those figures/data.
Number of people involved in this argument, 2,700 approx!
-
Ummmmmmmmm. why not just visit them? Online research isn't the bees knees, it's just a convenient short cut and can never show every map and every piece of paper, there's just too much of it all.
Passport / Id Card / destitution
in French Legal Issues
Posted
What Dog said.
Which is our country or origin, which country issued your passport, go there in person, if you're a Brit there's a system to get you back to the UK.