Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Illness Benefit query

  • 31-10-2013 1:29pm
    #1
    dnme
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,429 ✭✭✭


    I was recently out of work for a while while recovering from major surgery. During that time my employer paid me and asked me to claim illness benefit and pay that to them.

    I claimed illness benefit weekly for 2 months. Last week I had a letter from SW stating that my claim has been refused because I do not have 39 PRSI contributions paid in 2011 or I do not have 26 contributions paid in 2011 and 2010.

    In 2011 I like a lot of people was in receipt of social welfare (DA). Since then I have been back to work full time and like many others paying a fortune in PRSI, Tax and USC TAX. Then when I need to make a claim, I get this very convoluted rule thrown at me.

    Can anybody explain to me the thinking behind this. Is it that you must be working for two years before you can be eligible for IB? If you need illness benefit now, you must have been working and contributing 2 years ago, or 2/3 years ago. I just can't make sense of it.


Comments

  • #2
    LegacyUser
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 166,026 ✭✭✭✭LegacyUser


    I'm afraid I can't explain the logic behind the legislation but yes, they first qualifying condition of Illness Benefit is that you have 104 contributions (the equivalent of 2 full years of work). Then the second qualifying condition is looking into the tax year 2 years ago (so 2011) and your contributions there. You need 39. The 26 cons thing is just another way of trying to make you qualify if you don’t have those 39 cons.

    You will have to ask the legislators the reason behind the two year thing.


Advertisement