Have I got this wrong? ESA and Universal Credit

  • 39 Replies
  • 3227 Views

JLR2

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1742
Whilst reading one of the Universal Credit stories on the Guardian's web pages I noticed the following.

The government was explaining that those being moved over from ESA would not lose money, well call me a daft, way off the mark wishful thinker but I was given to understand that those moving from ESA would be required to submit a new application for Universal Credit, maybe I'm thinking in terms of the claiming process for PIP, anybody put me wise to things?

Oh and on the claim that no one transferring would lose money, they will when it comes to the yearly inflation up-rating of the benefits as this will not be provided for those passported from DLA.

Edit to add to title - Sunshine :-)
« Last Edit: 12 Oct 2018 04:21PM by Sunshine Meadows »

Monic1511

  • *
  • Moderator Welfare Rights
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2361

Re: Have I got this wrong?

  • on: 11 Oct 2018 08:27PM
If you are transferred by the DWP from legacy benefits (ESA/JSA/Child or working tax credits/housing benefit/Income Support) on Universal credit THEN you will remain on the same money as you will be "transitionally protected".  If they every reintroduce the annual increase by 1% then your money will not increase as you would be getting more than a new UC claimant


ESA claimant in support group with PIP standard daily living - current payment 175.05/week = 758.55 monthly
new claimant to UC ESA support group with PIP standard daily living current payment 646.14(without any housing element paid)


If you have a material change - found fit for work and have to claim UC as no income / move from one local authority to another and need to claim housing element / take on a partner / have your first child - all of those situations would close your legacy benefit claim and as a new claimant to UC you have no transitional protection so would only get the 646.14 rather than the amount you had before.


As all welfare rights officers keep going on about - There are no disability premiums in UC and no disabled child tax credit or disabled workers tax credit extra money.


 >crying< >steam< >yikes<

JLR2

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1742

Re: Have I got this wrong?

  • on: 11 Oct 2018 08:46PM
''new claimant to UC ESA support group with DLA (HRM/MRC) ?

Sorry Monic but I am a bit clueless when it comes to detail like this.

''If they every reintroduce the annual increase by 1% then your money will not increase as you would be getting more than a new UC claimant''

So I was right in thinking it is in effect being cut, albeit slowly.

Monic1511

  • *
  • Moderator Welfare Rights
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2361

Re: Have I got this wrong?

  • on: 11 Oct 2018 09:11PM

If anyone is on ESA and in support group and have DLA high rate mob and middle rate care then the only way they would have to claim UC would be if they moved from one local authority to another and needed housing benefit.  As housing benefit doesn't exist they would need to claim UC.   The other way they MIGHT have to claim UC would be if they were found fit for work and their ESA claim was closed.  They would have a choice - they could claim UC, put in a mandatory reconsideration of the ESA decision and wait for the decision and maybe appeal tribunal.  If they subsequently win their ESA appeal they WILL NOT return to ESA with all the additional premiums. If they claim UC then the door is shut on legacy benefits and they cannot get back onto ESA. 

 If you live in a full service area and are found fit for work closing your ESA claim and you have that PIP award you COULD exist on your PIP while waiting on the ESA MR to be done, once the ESA MR is accepted at tribunal stage you would go back onto ESA at the assessment phase while waiting on the appeal to be heard, since you have PIP you would get a disability premium as well.


Yes the whole thing is a money saving exercise and they have been upfront about that BUT they haven't explained that its because there are no disability premiums.

SG - support group money gets paid - WRAG work related activity group post April 2017 money does not get paid
DLA middle rate care /PIP standard rate daily living entitle you to the severe disability premium if you live alone, any award of PIP gets your a disability premium on ESA or JSA but these dont exist on UC.

Have I confused you enough? it's getting late and Im starting to confuse myself  >lol<

JLR2

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1742

Re: Have I got this wrong?

  • on: 11 Oct 2018 09:30PM
 >thumbsup< Yup I'm fair confused >lol<

If the government isn't embarrassed into pausing the roll out of UC I would expect at some point next year to find we are being forced onto UC. One of the big mysteries to me just now is quite what is going to happen in Scotland, in so much as I've heard about the Scottish government taking control over many of the disabled benefits so will this mean those of us in Scotland will be spared the UK government's roll out when that comes?

As you've said Monic, it is getting a bit late, besides I need to refill me coffee mug >biggrin<

JLR2

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1742

Re: Have I got this wrong?

  • on: 11 Oct 2018 09:44PM
1589.1 = 5 weeks at 317.82 so in theory the DWP is expecting claimants claiming Universal credit to have at least this level of money available to live on whilst they wait five weeks for their first payment of UC. Just how many would be claimants of UC does the government think are sitting with that sort of money lying in their bank accounts?

Sunshine Meadows

  • *
  • Global Moderator
  • Super Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7865
JLR Good topic for a thread, I just helped you out with the title  :-)

Monic I am so glad you are here to post the answers you do.  >bighugs<

During my time away from Ouch Too I did notice some people were talking on Facebook about Old Style ESA. It seemed like people who asked to keep getting Contirbutions Based ESA would do but they had to ask for it. I just did some Googling and :-

https://www.gov.uk/employment-support-allowance/types-of-esa  Not much really useful information on the Government link meh

This link does better https://www.youreable.com/forums/showthread.php?20738-UC-and-new-style-ESA-and-ESA

Quote
Existing Contribution Based ESA claims stay outside of UC, and stay as they are - 'Old Style' ESA governed by the 2008 regulations.

Does anyone know what happens if a person entitled to Contributions Based ESA was switched to Income Based ESA can they return back to getting Contributions based ESA?

« Last Edit: 12 Oct 2018 04:41PM by Sunshine Meadows »

Monic1511

  • *
  • Moderator Welfare Rights
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2361
If you are on cons based ESA and become entitled to income related ESA then the guidance I have been given is that you need to ask for a revision of the decision to pay only cons based esa as you are now entitled to an income related element.

The scenario of cons based ESA to income based and then back to cons would only happen if you were on ESA WRAG for 365 days, your contributions expire after 365 and then after reassessment you get put into the support group.

As long as you don't claim UC and have no breaks in your legacy benefit claim you can remain on it.   What you can no longer do in a full service area is go from ESA WRAG to employment and if you last less than 12 weeks go back to ESA.  There were linking rules that said if your break was less than 12 weeks and it was for employment you would go back to ESA - No longer so just before UC came in we were advising people NOT to take jobs if they already had ESA.  too risky for them.



JLR2 - the government assumes everyone has recourse to savings or enough credit to last a month with no money.   As for the amounts - its monthly and there are no weekly calculations.


If you made a claim today 12th October then your assessment period is 12th of one month to 11th of the next.  On the 11th of every month DWP asks HMRC how much income you have had since the 12th of the previous month.  They will then deduct any earnings off your standard allowance and release the payment which takes 7 days to hit your account.  This is why people get their assessment periods mixed up as they only notice when they get paid - in this case 17th of November.


A single adult needs 317.82 per month which is 3813.84 per year, we all know there are 13 4 week periods in a year so if its a 5 week month you just need to make your pennies last - you can see why everyone is skint.


There are many issues with UC and they would probably need a thread each as it gets very confusing.
 >doh<
Monic

JLR2

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1742
''As for the amounts - its monthly and there are no weekly calculations''

Aye, but you knew I knew that didn't you Monic >biggrin<  I used the figures I found elsewhere on another web page.

Regarding the 13 x 4 week months point, I feel it might be an idea for the DWP to decide if it is using the calendar month system or the 4 week system in 'all'  its calculations. This 4 week versus calendar month issue is something that could have an impact on my visiting Berlin as one of the questions on the BF5 form used by the DWP for temporary absences abroad asks, ''Have you been abroad in the last 3 months?''  I use the 4 week count and look to arrange any future flights with at least 12 weeks between previous visits. So far I have not faced any questions but like many things about the DWP and its systems I don't take things for granted. Thankfully, in a sad roundabout way, I will not be needing to travel so much as my friends in Berlin will now be able to visit me here in Scotland.

Fiz

  • *
  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4022
The government say they are deliberately changing to 12 calender monthly payments per year because this is how employed people are paid and this supposedly will get us used to monthly income so it's easier when we start to work. And that's when we all get miraculously better of course.

I am dreading UC. I can't see me managing to manage the money side of things, I only hope that rumour that people with mental illness will be allowed to have their housing benefit/rent portion of UC paid directly to the landlord/LA is true and is actually being allowed to happen with the roll out or I'll be at risk of homelessness.

Hopefully the police will be fitting alarms and locks to my house soon, I've no idea if that will prevent the LA from bullying me into downsizing. There isn't another LA property in my town that meets my needs that is a 1 or 2 bed property. Even the LA admit they don't have such properties. The LA lady I spoke to says the measures the government are taking are unrealistic ad cruel and they were her words!

lankou

  • *
  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2891
The government say they are deliberately changing to 12 calender monthly payments per year because this is how employed people are paid and this supposedly will get us used to monthly income so it's easier when we start to work. And that's when we all get miraculously better of course.



That is THE big problem with UC 13 payments of benefits a year just does not mesh with 12 wages payments a year.

JLR2

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1742
I can but only guess at this but here goes, a guy or woman gets a job paid monthly OK now the employer has told this new employee what their wage will be over the course of a year's employment, let's say the employer has explained the job pays 23,000 a year, it would hardly be beyond the employer's capabilities to divide this wage by 12 or 13 and were it required by 52 weekly payments so why not the government?

A 13 month payment system would do a couple of things, first it would allow the government to, as it claimed its point of monthly payments was about, get claimants to start budgeting for monthly wage payments but perhaps more useful would be the avoidance of the situation whereby those on the 12 monthly payment option did not face the problems of double month payments as would happen due to five week months being part of our calendar. I might be wrong but I'm sure I heard somewhere that the DWP under UC do not allow for 2 payments of UC in any one month period.

A 13 month (4 week payment) system might also be of some use where someone is working as self employed for much of the same reason as I was just suggesting. Perhaps I'm just havering....again :-)

Monic1511

  • *
  • Moderator Welfare Rights
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2361
Fiz - Landlords can apply for direct payments when they have vulnerable tenants, you can request it as well but normally only after the first payment is made to you.  Discretionary housing payments are also available to people on universal credit the same as folk on housing benefit and you should reapply - I know they refused you in the past but you need a spare room for a carer.


As for monthly payments being a reflection of employment - why then did we see a massive escalation in pay day lenders - oh wait it was because employed people couldn't make their wages last the month  >doh<  If you cant do it in employment how the heck can you do it on state benefits.

The DWP is aware that thousands of local authority employees who get or will be eligible for UC are paid 4 weekly, they already know that these people will have 2 payments within the one assessment period that COULD close their UC claim as they will technically have had too much money that month and will get a nil payment.   The DWP are already aware that these people will need to reclaim UC to make sure they get a payment the following month.    If your paid fortnightly or weekly this could happen to you 2, 3 or 4 times a year.

Its only under the Scottish system that some UC claimants are paid 2 weekly but its the same money just halved and the deductions are still a big issue.

Council staff are paid fortnightly or 4 weekly, many small traders still pay weekly, its only corporate businesses that pay monthly. correct me if I'm wrong.

Another thing thats written into UC is that you cannot go on holiday abroad as you cannot meet your claimant commitment.   I need to find the rules again but if your not in the UK they reserve the right not to pay you.
 >crying<


JLR2

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1742
''Another thing thats written into UC is that you cannot go on holiday abroad....''

First I heard of this Monic, it is a scenario that sounds pretty much to me that in future UC claimants will become in effect inmates of the largest open prison in the world with the only release/escape being in a well paying job, at least one that paid enough for someone to afford a holiday abroad.

lankou

  • *
  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2891
''Another thing thats written into UC is that you cannot go on holiday abroad....''

First I heard of this Monic, it is a scenario that sounds pretty much to me that in future UC claimants will become in effect inmates of the largest open prison in the world with the only release/escape being in a well paying job, at least one that paid enough for someone to afford a holiday abroad.

To nip this in the bud:-

More at link:-

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/298762/response/727736/attach/2/FOI%204569%20reply.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

Under Universal Credit a claimant can go abroad for a period of a month for any reason, a
longer period of up to six months temporary absence abroad is also allowable for reasons of
medical treatment. However, if a claimant chooses to go on holiday in Great Britain or abroad
they must continue to carry out the work-related requirements as set out on their Claimant
Commitment.
No allowances are made within the conditionality regime for claimants going on holiday. For
example claimants within the All Work-Related Requirements Group with no restrictions on
their availability will still be expected to be immediately available to attend a job interview or
take up an offer of employment, even if this means cutting short a holiday. They are also
required to attend their normal appointments and failure to do so will incur a sanction.