UC benefit cap

Mrsn

Going through my statement earlier whilst looking for other information it states that might payments might be reduced after the 10th December due to the “benefit cap”

A quick search makes me believe that we should be exempt from this as my husband works 38 hrs a week and myself 18 hrs but if anybody more knowledgable than myself could clarify this I would be grateful.

I have left a message in my journal regarding this but haven’t been answered as yet.

Alice_Holt

Sounds very odd to me. Is it a general statement or specific to your claim?

The cap does not apply where:
Net earned income (combined income if part of a couple) in a monthly assessment period is above the relevant threshold (roughly the equivalent net earnings from 16 hours per week paid at the national living wage rate).
The relevant threshold being is on the monthly amount a person earns by working 16 hours a week at the national living wage – which is £569.22 a month currently ((£8.21 x 16 x 52) / 12).

Not sure why 10th December is quoted. Is that your assessment period end?

https://revenuebenefits.org.uk/universal-credit/guidance/entitlement-to-uc/benefit-cap/

https://www.entitledto.co.uk/help/benefits-cap

huckster

As long as you have earnings of £569 or more included within a statement calculation, the benefit cap will not kick in.

What can sometimes happen, is that for reasons of wage payment dates being altered by employers, is that for some assessment period no earnings are used to calculate UC award. This would then cause the benefit cap to be triggered. This stops the award being more than the cap for the period. The award would take into account child benefit you receive separately.

It is not odd. If people have provided previous employment earnings details, before they claimed UC, there might be a benefit cap grace period involved. If you earn so much within the last 12 months, then the benefit cap does not apply for a period.

https://www.turn2us.org.uk/Benefit-guides/Benefit-Cap/Am-I-affected-by-the-Benefit-Cap

Alice_Holt

huckster wrote: »

This would then cause the benefit cap to be triggered. This stops the award being more than the cap for the period.

Would that be covered by the "grace period" exemption, I wonder?

If not, I wonder if it will be subject to legal challenge along the lines of Johnson and others.
https://cpag.org.uk/welfare-rights/legal-test-cases/universal-credit-assessment-period-inflexibility

It seems very illogical that a working couple should have the cap applied purely because of the inflexibility of UC to apportion earnings to the correct period.

calcotti

Alice_Holt wrote: »

Not sure why 10th December is quoted. Is that your assessment period end?]

From a previous thread by OP his assessment periods do indeed end on the 10th of each month.

calcotti

Alice_Holt wrote: »

It seems very illogical that a working couple should have the cap applied purely because of the inflexibility of UC to apportion earnings to the correct period.

A point also picked up by CPAG here https://cpag.org.uk/sites/default/files/files/policypost/CPAG-2018-Rough-justice.pdf

Alice_Holt

calcotti wrote: »

From a previous thread by OP his assessment periods do indeed end on the 10th of each month.

Thanks.

it still seems odd to me that a DWP employee would post such a note on a claimants journal when they are earning well in excess of the 16 hours at MNW exception, even if a previous grace benefit is about to expire.

With both working more than 16hrs, this could help avoid any chance of no earnings in an assessment period (if the OPs have differing paydays).

Be interested to hear the UC response to the OP's query.

huckster

The argument is that earnings are applied correctly. UC uses the earnings, when they are reported.

Very much doubt, Government will re-engineer UC, so that the normal wage date of employers is used. They then apportion the standard wages the same amount for each AP, adding on any extra received e.g. Overtime, secondary earnings.

Some people advocate change. But what if the changed way of dealing with earnings affects more people than the current method.

huckster

Alice

It is the statement that states when the benefit cap applies, not a journal message. This is standard.

What happens with a UC claim, is that when earnings information for the previously 12 months is supplied, is that the grace period is calculated.

On a brand new claim, if the claimants disclosure states they have worked within last 12 months, in the absence of the previous earnings information, the first AP is calculated without benefit cap ( assumed grace period) . If later the earnings information is not enough for a grace period, any overpayment for the first AP is calculated. The statement then shows when the benefit cap starts from. Where the previous earnings earn a grace period, no overpayment is calculated and the statement is noted as to when the benefit cap applies.

Alice_Holt

huckster wrote: »

Alice

It is the statement that states when the benefit cap applies, not a journal message. This is standard.

What happens with a UC claim, is that when earnings information for the previously 12 months is supplied, is that the grace period is calculated.

On a brand new claim, if the claimants disclosure states they have worked within last 12 months, in the absence of the previous earnings information, the first AP is calculated without benefit cap ( assumed grace period) . If later the earnings information is not enough for a grace period, any overpayment for the first AP is calculated. The statement then shows when the benefit cap starts from. Where the previous earnings earn a grace period, no overpayment is calculated and the statement is noted as to when the benefit cap applies.

Thanks huckster.

calcotti

huckster wrote: »

Very much doubt, Government will re-engineer UC, so that the normal wage date of employers is used.

The (current) government certainly has no wish to do so but their hand may be forced if the Court of Appeal rules against them when the Johnson case gets heard next year.

It goes against ‘natural’ justice that two claimants with identical earnings paid on exactly the same days can end up with different levels of support just because their assessment periods are different.