We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Universal Credit 16k+ savings transistional protection?

17810121315

Comments

  • stevemLS wrote: »
    Give us one, just one, example of a successful claim for compensation on this basis.

    There is no legal cause of action here and local authorities are not daft, they know that this is the case.

    That is different to a council deciding not to go ahead with a scheme after consulting.

    I am talking about a council (my council) that changes the building plans midway through a development and without any consultation, tells the developer to scrap those 6 x 5 bed detached properties, you now have to build x number of low cost housing in their place. Totally wrong that they put them in the middle of an exclusive development.


    The property owners that had bought pre this change bought on the strength that all of the surrounding properties would be similar to theirs. As it is now, their properties have been devalued and are having difficulty selling them on to get away from this mini council estate.


    Hence why they are banding together as they are told that they have a case against the council for their losses. When the plans were agreed that is what should have been built - not have an 11th hour change that no one knew about. None would have bought if that information had been made available at the start of the development.
  • thor
    thor Posts: 5,506 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts
    SkyeKnight wrote: »
    Because they will then have a lower income than an unemployed family - and thus no incentive to work. But the purpose of Universal Credit is to make work pay!
    Plus don't forget Ian Duncan Smith's promise all those years ago that nobody claiming tax credits at the time will be worse off under UC - A blatant lie!
  • bloolagoon
    bloolagoon Posts: 7,973 Forumite
    thor wrote: »
    Plus don't forget Ian Duncan Smith's promise all those years ago that nobody claiming tax credits at the time will be worse off under UC - A blatant lie!

    They do if they work surely. Who isn't?
    Tomorrow is the most important thing in life
  • zagfles
    zagfles Posts: 21,548 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Chutzpah Haggler
    CRITCHK wrote: »
    Hi sorry I did not reply earlier been busy with work and family life! Thanks for all your comments and advice and wow did not realise there would be so many replies.
    For your info my husband and I both used to work very hard 7 days a week and late nights when we were younger and have payed off our mortgage so no housing costs. We saved the money when we were working and do not save anything now. We have a very modest lifestyle. We both got made redundant and had to start again at work and are in low paid jobs part time although we work 60 hours a week between us. I am a non tax payer and pay a small amount of NI a couple of pounds a month (will this qualify me for a pension?)
    Yes, if you earn above the LEL which is £109pw you'll get credits towards your state pension (this is below the level of income when you start paying).
    We get just over £500 a month (no where near 11k a year) WTC and CTC combined. We both have ISA and Pension we wanted the ISA for emergency funds or if we were too sick and wanted to retire early. We earn over 15k between us, but pay into pension and give to charity which you can take the gross amount off your CTC figure for both. This keeps us around the 15k level. (we earn a few thousand above that figure)
    We would not be able to manage if we did not get the CTC / WTC and this is why I am worried about the future. Sounds like there will be transitional protect, but not if you have over 16k in savings so am considering putting more in pensions to reduce savings to below 6k. We need to sort something out for our future as never been in final salary scheme and only ever had personal pension.
    Under current plans there will be transitional protection for those with savings (ignore all the sanctimonious moralising about whether there should be or not), see http://www.revenuebenefits.org.uk/tax-credits/transition-to-universal-credit/overview-of-universal-credit/capital-rules/

    But they could always change their minds on this or make transitional protection easy to end, so it may be worth diverting money to your pension and drawing down on your savings, and of course this will get you more tax credits now. Provided you fully understand the restrictions on access to your money when in a pension.
  • zagfles
    zagfles Posts: 21,548 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Chutzpah Haggler
    edited 8 February 2014 at 12:40AM
    FBaby wrote: »
    No they are not when they pay a lot more into the purse even when they don't use the services (and then taxed again for not using the service). Those working who pay towards free healthcare don't have a choice but to pay, so how does need become an issue (as opposed to taking when you don't need to take)?
    They don't have a choice to pay towards healthcare and they don't have a choice to pay towards benefits like JSA and tax credits. So it's not an issue when they take free healthcare they are entitled to and it's not an issue when they take benefits they are entitled to.
  • stevemLS
    stevemLS Posts: 1,067 Forumite
    tinkledom wrote: »
    I am talking about a council (my council) that changes the building plans midway through a development and without any consultation, tells the developer to scrap those 6 x 5 bed detached properties, you now have to build x number of low cost housing in their place. Totally wrong that they put them in the middle of an exclusive development.


    The property owners that had bought pre this change bought on the strength that all of the surrounding properties would be similar to theirs. As it is now, their properties have been devalued and are having difficulty selling them on to get away from this mini council estate.


    Hence why they are banding together as they are told that they have a case against the council for their losses. When the plans were agreed that is what should have been built - not have an 11th hour change that no one knew about. None would have bought if that information had been made available at the start of the development.

    Mate, you're talking crap.

    Once a council has given planning consent, it has no legal power to amend it providing any conditions are complied with and it hasn't expired - a developer has 5 years from the date of the consent to commence works.
  • tinkledom
    tinkledom Posts: 556 Forumite
    edited 8 February 2014 at 11:59AM
    stevemLS wrote: »
    Mate, you're talking crap.

    Once a council has given planning consent, it has no legal power to amend it providing any conditions are complied with and it hasn't expired - a developer has 5 years from the date of the consent to commence works.

    Exactly, that is the case under argument. The planners realised late in the day that the developer had not built the correct quota of low cost housing units. The claim these people are seeking to make will be against the council for failing to spot the correct ratio of designer homes V low cost housing and/or the developer if they were responsible for the blunder.


    At the end of the day someone is at fault as the site plan that people bought from bears little resemblance to what has now been built.


    If I was buying a £1/2m home I certainly would not want this 'mini council estate' on my doorstep which has brought nothing but trouble to the area.
    It isn't surprising that once there was a crime free area within a large gated residential development, now crime has been imported by virtue of these 'renters'.
  • Morglin
    Morglin Posts: 15,922 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    edited 8 February 2014 at 3:37PM
    tinkledom wrote: »
    If I was buying a £1/2m home I certainly would not want this 'mini council estate' on my doorstep which has brought nothing but trouble to the area.
    It isn't surprising that once there was a crime free area within a large gated residential development, now crime has been imported by virtue of these 'renters'.

    You do talk rubbish - I live in an area where £3million+ homes sit near to HA homes. Everything else is in between - all types of properties.:doh:

    The crime rate round here is very low, we have no hassles and, in the main, everyone gets along well.

    But the homes and surrounds, over the years, have been well designed - no ugly blocks of flats, loads of green and common space, and spacious housing - rental or purchased.

    I would also say that I have rented, all of my adult life, by choice - and not once have I, or my family, introduced crime, vandalism, or anti-social behaviour to an area..... :

    We all worked, and we all improve the properties - because high standards of behaviour have nothing with renting/buying, or wealth, for that matter.

    Stop generalising and try, for once, to add something useful to a debate. :mad:

    The last Government insisted 30% of any development included affordable housing. This government dropped that criteria, so it now varies.

    But there is a small development being built close to us that has large detached housing, and some affordable housing for HA rental - all on the same development.

    Lin :whistle:
    You can tell a lot about a woman by her hands..........for instance, if they are placed around your throat, she's probably slightly upset. ;)
  • CRITCHK
    CRITCHK Posts: 21 Forumite
    zagfles wrote: »
    Yes, if you earn above the LEL which is £109pw you'll get credits towards your state pension (this is below the level of income when you start paying). Under current plans there will be transitional protection for those with savings (ignore all the sanctimonious moralising about whether there should be or not), see http://www.revenuebenefits.org.uk/tax-credits/transition-to-universal-credit/overview-of-universal-credit/capital-rules/

    But they could always change their minds on this or make transitional protection easy to end, so it may be worth diverting money to your pension and drawing down on your savings, and of course this will get you more tax credits now. Provided you fully understand the restrictions on access to your money when in a pension.

    Good post very helpful. Thanks for the link. The other option is to give money to my children, but I think there is a limit on that. 3k per year (is that in total or per child?)
  • Indie_Kid
    Indie_Kid Posts: 23,097 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    CRITCHK wrote: »
    Good post very helpful. Thanks for the link. The other option is to give money to my children, but I think there is a limit on that. 3k per year (is that in total or per child?)

    This may be classed as deprivation of capital and you may still be treated as if you have it.
    Sealed pot challenge #232. Gold stars from Sue-UU - :staradmin :staradmin £75.29 banked
    50p saver #40 £20 banked
    Virtual sealed pot #178 £80.25
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.2K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.4K Life & Family
  • 258.8K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.