£20 extra on JSA is this right a court case last week for people on legacy benefits

p00hsticks

Muttleythefrog said:

Where there is a will there is a way... for example the DWP seems capable of issuing Cold Weather Payments to relevant claimants on relevant benefits. There must be systems like that (it's just one off top of head) which could have been temporarily used....

Trust me, there aren't. Cold Weather Payments work in an entirely different way for an entirely different cohort. By far the simplest and most cost-effective way would have been for individuals to elect to move over to UC but I'm guessing that many chose not to because they would have then received less or had savings that precluded them from being eligible.

Robbie64

p00hsticks said:

Muttleythefrog said:

Where there is a will there is a way... for example the DWP seems capable of issuing Cold Weather Payments to relevant claimants on relevant benefits. There must be systems like that (it's just one off top of head) which could have been temporarily used....

Trust me, there aren't. Cold Weather Payments work in an entirely different way for an entirely different cohort. By far the simplest and most cost-effective way would have been for individuals to elect to move over to UC but I'm guessing that many chose not to because they would have then received less or had savings that precluded them from being eligible.

If they had savings that would make them ineligible for UC then they would have been ineligible for legacy benefits too. Tax Credits applicants, who may have had savings of £16k+, got an uplift to their tax credits so didn't need to move over to UC.

calcotti

Robbie64 said: If they had savings that would make them ineligible for UC then they would have been ineligible for legacy benefits too. Tax Credits applicants, who may have had savings of £16k+, got an uplift to their tax credits so didn't need to move over to UC.

Only claimants eligible for Working Tax Credits got the uplift, not those on Child Tax Credits only.

Robbie64

calcotti said:

Robbie64 said: If they had savings that would make them ineligible for UC then they would have been ineligible for legacy benefits too. Tax Credits applicants, who may have had savings of £16k+, got an uplift to their tax credits so didn't need to move over to UC.

Only claimants eligible for Working Tax Credits got the uplift, not those on Child Tax Credits only.

I'd forgotten about that. Extending it to CTC would have been one way of also targetting families on legacy benefits. The fact it didn't happen shows that the Government were trying to restrict the cost of the uplift.

calcotti

Robbie64 said:

calcotti said:

Robbie64 said: If they had savings that would make them ineligible for UC then they would have been ineligible for legacy benefits too. Tax Credits applicants, who may have had savings of £16k+, got an uplift to their tax credits so didn't need to move over to UC.

Only claimants eligible for Working Tax Credits got the uplift, not those on Child Tax Credits only.

I'd forgotten about that. Extending it to CTC would have been one way of also targetting families on legacy benefits. The fact it didn't happen shows that the Government were trying to restrict the cost of the uplift.

Nonetheless I agree with your general point that those on legacy benefits could have moved to UC if they wished. Those on CTC only with over £16,000 would not have had that option but arguably not unreasonable to expect them to draw on savings if necessary.

All academic now anyway unless the appellants decide to pursue further legal action (not that i would expect a different outcome if they do).

Nannytone

Those claiming the SDP were speifically prevented from claiming UC until january 2021

Spoonie_Turtle

Nannytone said:

Those claiming the SDP were speifically prevented from claiming UC until january 2021

That is true, but as far as I understand, those people received higher amounts than the increased UC anyway.  They didn't 'lose out' on any extra money in that respect.

Nannytone

I understand that, but the issue was that some received £20 extra in addition to their entitlement and not what their entitlement was

Muttleythefrog

p00hsticks said:

Muttleythefrog said:

Where there is a will there is a way... for example the DWP seems capable of issuing Cold Weather Payments to relevant claimants on relevant benefits. There must be systems like that (it's just one off top of head) which could have been temporarily used....

Trust me, there aren't. Cold Weather Payments work in an entirely different way for an entirely different cohort. By far the simplest and most cost-effective way would have been for individuals to elect to move over to UC but I'm guessing that many chose not to because they would have then received less or had savings that precluded them from being eligible.

That's just an example...the government used generic tools like Council Tax Support (which also wasn't designed to deal with one off type support as happened) to target support. I imagine many (like myself - who follows benefit changes so well above average knowledge for a claimant I'd propose) assumed that they could not move unless circumstances triggered such... I only discovered differently by a throwaway comment on MSE IIRC just as I found out I might have been underpaid ESA. Some I understand would have not been able to. There's a total lack of information through rollout... and when politicians engaged the legacy benefit uplift issue I honesty didn't see any (perhaps there are examples out there I didn't see) including my own MP suggest people could move if it benefitted them... and possibly because either they didn't know or they thought the government would do the right thing ultimately. 

Spoonie_Turtle

Nannytone said:

I understand that, but the issue was that some received £20 extra in addition to their entitlement and not what their entitlement was

Indeed not, and that's a slightly separate issue - most people complaining they got *less* money than UC could have moved over, although granted a lot of people didn't know that.  People with the SDP didn't get less money, but their issue is that they couldn't access an increase.