Universal credit and private pension contributions

TMel42

Before moving to UC, I did check on entitled to and also had an online 1 to 1 chat with a citizens advice rep who agreed all pension contributions would be deducted from the UC total. And also there is the historical processing, that previously the income total was calculated with the private pension deductions through tax credits from 2015-2020 with no problem. 

A large issue with this now is that they will not look at everything as a whole case and will on look at what have taken to tribunal from that one MR. I have now had 3 MR’s across the board and one tribunal and no further forward 

calcotti

Dazed_and_C0nfused said:

Maybe one of the UC experts could explain what disregarded means in UC terms?

Disregarded as earnings.

Dazed_and_C0nfused said:

Although you couldn't include contributions made under salary sacrifice personal contributions to a "relief at source" scheme, which is what I think the op is doing, can be deducted.

I don't follow the above paragraph

Dazed_and_C0nfused

calcotti said:

Dazed_and_C0nfused said:

Maybe one of the UC experts could explain what disregarded means in UC terms?

Disregarded as earnings.

Dazed_and_C0nfused said:

Although you couldn't include contributions made under salary sacrifice personal contributions to a "relief at source" scheme, which is what I think the op is doing, can be deducted.

I don't follow the above paragraph

I was basing it on the information on the entitledto.co.uk link,

Do not include pension contributions made by employers. All employer pension contributions are ignored completely in benefits and should not be included in the amount entered for gross earnings or anywhere else in the calculator.

Salary sacrifice means you are reducing your salary in return for your employer making extra contributions into your pension, you aren't actually contributing yourself.

For example say you have a salary of £30k and salary sacrifice 10% into a pension.  Your taxable pay (as shown on your P60) would only be £27k.  If you deducted the pension contributions you would end up at £24k, so double counting them.

calcotti

"Do not include pension contributions made by employers. All employer pension contributions are ignored completely in benefits and should not be included in the amount entered for gross earnings or anywhere else in the calculator."

I understand what you mean now. Note however that the above paragraph is more generally referring to all employer contributions, not just salary sacrifice.

NedS

TMel42 said:

The appeal notes are a few pages long but I think the significant paragraph is as follows:

'private pension contributions made after tax and national insurance deductions is not income that universal credit deducts from earnings. As explained previous Real Time Information gives information to Universal Credit of how much is earned. If xxxx wants to pay into a private pension after all her deductions by HMRC are taken then that is completely down to xxxx, but that 'money' will not be disregarded because it is paid into a private pension. This is income that she could easily spend in the assessment period on anything else

I have considered all of the available evidence and I uphold the original decision to use the earnings advised by HMRC.'

This is just plain wrong. It would appear the tribunal judge have been hoodwinked into believing what DWP have told them rather than reading and applying the law to the situation in front of them (UC Regs 55(5)(a)). Why on earth would they thing the law doesn't apply to you? You will need to follow whatever process exists to challenge this decision on the basis that it is unlawful.

UC Regs 55(5)(a):

(5) In calculating the amount of a person’s employed earnings in respect of an
assessment period, there are to be deducted from the amount of general earnings or
benefits specified in paragraphs (2) to (4)–
(a) any relievable pension contributions made by the person in that period;

TMel42

NedS said:

TMel42 said:

The appeal notes are a few pages long but I think the significant paragraph is as follows:

'private pension contributions made after tax and national insurance deductions is not income that universal credit deducts from earnings. As explained previous Real Time Information gives information to Universal Credit of how much is earned. If xxxx wants to pay into a private pension after all her deductions by HMRC are taken then that is completely down to xxxx, but that 'money' will not be disregarded because it is paid into a private pension. This is income that she could easily spend in the assessment period on anything else

I have considered all of the available evidence and I uphold the original decision to use the earnings advised by HMRC.'

This is just plain wrong. It would appear the tribunal judge have been hoodwinked into believing what DWP have told them rather than reading and applying the law to the situation in front of them (UC Regs 55(5)(a)). Why on earth would they thing the law doesn't apply to you? You will need to follow whatever process exists to challenge this decision on the basis that it is unlawful.

UC Regs 55(5)(a):

(5) In calculating the amount of a person’s employed earnings in respect of an
assessment period, there are to be deducted from the amount of general earnings or
benefits specified in paragraphs (2) to (4)–
(a) any relievable pension contributions made by the person in that period;

It is totally maddening,?in my additional evidence I very clearly used that regulation and regs 61 & 62 stating about the exceptions to real time information. 

I just really don’t understand how a judge can rule as they did when it is that clearly stated. 

Alice_Holt

TMel42 said:

A large issue with this now is that they will not look at everything as a whole case and will on look at what have taken to tribunal from that one MR. I have now had 3 MR’s across the board and one tribunal and no further forward 

      So, each MR is for a separate assessment period (AP) ?

     The MR that has gone to tribunal was for 30/1 to 26/2, and other MR / appeals (on the same topic) are pending?


    Then, when the next MR goes to appeal (or this tribunal decision is reheard) include something like this on your submission:
       'UC have consistently failed to deduct all my relievable pension contributions pensions contributions from earnings. The AP,s are xxx to xxx.  I would ask the tribunal to overturn these DWP decisions, and direct UC to apply Regulation 55 of the UC Regulations correctly to all my future pension contributions. These regulations make no distinction between private and occupational pension contributions.'


   I would suggest going back to Cit A, explain the tribunal decision is different to their advice. That you believe the tribunal has made actually an error in law, and that you would like their help to appeal the decision to the Upper Tribunal. 
  Also ask them to contact their Expert Advice Team (EAT) by email to establish if there are any Upper Tribunal (UT) decisions on this matter that you can quote in your request to have this decision set aside.  (UT decisions set precedence for Lower Tribunals)
     

   

Alice_Holt

TMel42 said:

NedS said:

TMel42 said:

The appeal notes are a few pages long but I think the significant paragraph is as follows:

'private pension contributions made after tax and national insurance deductions is not income that universal credit deducts from earnings. As explained previous Real Time Information gives information to Universal Credit of how much is earned. If xxxx wants to pay into a private pension after all her deductions by HMRC are taken then that is completely down to xxxx, but that 'money' will not be disregarded because it is paid into a private pension. This is income that she could easily spend in the assessment period on anything else

I have considered all of the available evidence and I uphold the original decision to use the earnings advised by HMRC.'

This is just plain wrong. It would appear the tribunal judge have been hoodwinked into believing what DWP have told them rather than reading and applying the law to the situation in front of them (UC Regs 55(5)(a)). Why on earth would they thing the law doesn't apply to you? You will need to follow whatever process exists to challenge this decision on the basis that it is unlawful.

UC Regs 55(5)(a):

(5) In calculating the amount of a person’s employed earnings in respect of an
assessment period, there are to be deducted from the amount of general earnings or
benefits specified in paragraphs (2) to (4)–
(a) any relievable pension contributions made by the person in that period;

In my additional evidence I very clearly used that regulation and regs 61 & 62 stating about the exceptions to real time information. 

I just really don’t understand how a judge can rule as they did when it is that clearly stated. 

    Are you sure your additional evidence formed part of the evidence bundle seen by the judge?

    Did HMCTS send you back copies of your evidence (with a covering letter citing further evidence), the copies of which are now numbered at the top of the page? 
    If not, then a breach of procedure / natural justice has occurred - this is sufficient in its own to get the decision overturned. 

calcotti

Alice_Holt said: 

       'UC have consistently failed to deduct all my any relievable pension contributions pensions contributions from earnings. The AP,s are xxx to xxx.  I would ask the tribunal to overturn these DWP decisions, and direct UC to apply Regulation 55 of the UC Regulations correctly to all my future pension contributions. These regulations make no distinction between private and occupational pension contributions.'

I suggest that it is not a matter of distinguishing between private and occupational pension schemes. rather it is that the regulations place no limitation on the application of regulation 55(5)(a) which is therefore clearly intended to apply to all relievable pension contributions. It therefore does not matter whether the contributions are shown on RTI records or are made by some other means.

NedS

calcotti said:

Alice_Holt said: 

       'UC have consistently failed to deduct all my any relievable pension contributions pensions contributions from earnings. The AP,s are xxx to xxx.  I would ask the tribunal to overturn these DWP decisions, and direct UC to apply Regulation 55 of the UC Regulations correctly to all my future pension contributions. These regulations make no distinction between private and occupational pension contributions.'

I suggest that it is not a matter of distinguishing between private and occupational pension schemes. rather it is that the regulations place no limitation on the application of regulation 55(5)(a) which is therefore clearly intended to apply to all relievable pension contributions. It therefore does not matter whether the contributions are shown on RTI records or are made by some other means.

Exactly, as stated in Reg 55(5)(a)