We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
Benefit cap


I have a question about how the benefit cap works. I was thinking of a pretty straightforward case of a single adult claiming JSA. As I understand it the benefit cap is per week 296.35 (in London). Where this includes rent and JSA. Where JSA is for personal costs. Given that JSA is 74.70 that leaves 221.65 for the rent.
But does the government Department paying this consider the two amounts separately. What I mean is suppose a claimant wanted to move to somewhere where the rent was 260 per week. This is within the cap so in principle it sounds fine. But it would mean that a claimant would move there and then have to pay the 38.35 shortfall in rent out of what would otherwise have been their JSA. Leaving them only 36.35 JSA. But would the Department not object to this? Because the claimant is supposed to have 74.70 for their personal costs?
I am trying to help someone but I don’t know all the details of this kind of thing. I know it’s all UC and LHA now. If there’s some website that answers my question please send me a link to that. I haven’t been able to find anything myself.
Thanks very much.
Comments
-
The benefit cap includes help with any rent you maybe claiming from either Universal Credit or housing benefit (if you're already claiming this) Details here. https://www.entitledto.co.uk/help/benefits-cap
0 -
Although benefits are based on various calculations/allowances the amounts actually received can be spent on anything. There is no 'supposed to have' for particular purposes about it. If your general point is that benefit levels are too low that is a political discussion and may would would agree with you (although others would not).
Benefit cap - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
Benefits cap - Entitledto
What is the Benefit Cap? - Turn2us
Dealing with the benefit cap - Shelter England
Information I post is for England unless otherwise stated. Some rules may be different in other parts of UK.0 -
Thanks for the replies so far guys! Just to clarify, and maybe to emphasise the naivety of my question. What I am thinking is: isn't the cap applied separately to the rent part? Leaving the JSA part fixed. So, in the example above the Department would not pay on any claim for rent over 221.65 per week. I find it odd that the Department will not have measures in place to prevent claimants from using money intended for their personal costs on rent. I know that this sounds like I am expecting some kind of 'nanny state'!0
-
Abram918 said:Thanks for the replies so far guys! Just to clarify, and maybe to emphasise the naivety of my question. What I am thinking is: isn't the cap applied separately to the rent part? Leaving the JSA part fixed. So, in the example above the Department would not pay on any claim for rent over 221.65 per week. I find it odd that the Department will not have measures in place to prevent claimants from using money intended for their personal costs on rent. I know that this sounds like I am expecting some kind of 'nanny state'!
The rent element for private renting often doesn't actually cover the whole rent - the LHA rate is currently set at 30% of the market average for the area - so those people would already be using money from the standard (personal) allowance amount to keep a roof over their heads, even if they've not been affected by the cap.0 -
Abram918 said: What I am thinking is: isn't the cap applied separately to the rent part?
Benefit cap - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)The benefit cap affects:Please read the links.- Universal Credit
- Bereavement Allowance
- Child Benefit
- Child Tax Credit
- Employment and Support Allowance
- Housing Benefit
- Incapacity Benefit
- Income Support
- Jobseeker’s Allowance
- Maternity Allowance
- Severe Disablement Allowance
- Widowed Parent’s Allowance (or Widowed Mother’s Allowance or Widow’s Pension if you started getting it before 9 April 2001)
Abram918 said:. I find it odd that the Department will not have measures in place to prevent claimants from using money intended for their personal costs on rent.Information I post is for England unless otherwise stated. Some rules may be different in other parts of UK.0 -
Abram918 said:Thanks for the replies so far guys! Just to clarify, and maybe to emphasise the naivety of my question. What I am thinking is: isn't the cap applied separately to the rent part? Leaving the JSA part fixed. So, in the example above the Department would not pay on any claim for rent over 221.65 per week. I find it odd that the Department will not have measures in place to prevent claimants from using money intended for their personal costs on rent. I know that this sounds like I am expecting some kind of 'nanny state'!
1 -
Abram918 said:
I have a question about how the benefit cap works. I was thinking of a pretty straightforward case of a single adult claiming JSA. As I understand it the benefit cap is per week 296.35 (in London). Where this includes rent and JSA. Where JSA is for personal costs. Given that JSA is 74.70 that leaves 221.65 for the rent.
But does the government Department paying this consider the two amounts separately. What I mean is suppose a claimant wanted to move to somewhere where the rent was 260 per week. This is within the cap so in principle it sounds fine. But it would mean that a claimant would move there and then have to pay the 38.35 shortfall in rent out of what would otherwise have been their JSA. Leaving them only 36.35 JSA. But would the Department not object to this? Because the claimant is supposed to have 74.70 for their personal costs?
I am trying to help someone but I don’t know all the details of this kind of thing. I know it’s all UC and LHA now. If there’s some website that answers my question please send me a link to that. I haven’t been able to find anything myself.
Thanks very much.
The links given are very useful but for someone not familiar with the benefit situation they can be a bit daunting.
For example there are exemptions to the benefit cap plus potential help if the claimant needs extra help with the rent because of the benefit cap.
The above information is within the links so no disrespect to the posters of the links.
Just so much simpler to give us the actual scenario so we can advise and ask any required questions.0 -
pmlindyloo said:
It is far easier for us to help if you can give details of the situation re: the person you are trying to help...
Just so much simpler to give us the actual scenario so we can advise and ask any required questions.Information I post is for England unless otherwise stated. Some rules may be different in other parts of UK.0 -
pmlindyloo said:Abram918 said:
I have a question about how the benefit cap works. I was thinking of a pretty straightforward case of a single adult claiming JSA. As I understand it the benefit cap is per week 296.35 (in London). Where this includes rent and JSA. Where JSA is for personal costs. Given that JSA is 74.70 that leaves 221.65 for the rent.
But does the government Department paying this consider the two amounts separately. What I mean is suppose a claimant wanted to move to somewhere where the rent was 260 per week. This is within the cap so in principle it sounds fine. But it would mean that a claimant would move there and then have to pay the 38.35 shortfall in rent out of what would otherwise have been their JSA. Leaving them only 36.35 JSA. But would the Department not object to this? Because the claimant is supposed to have 74.70 for their personal costs?
I am trying to help someone but I don’t know all the details of this kind of thing. I know it’s all UC and LHA now. If there’s some website that answers my question please send me a link to that. I haven’t been able to find anything myself.
Thanks very much.
Or ask the person to post here their self if possible because it's always difficult to give advice in these situations.
0 -
There's actually not very much more to the situation as I've described it. Person (single adult) is living in a high rent place and are making up the shortfall from their JSA. Leaving them with about £35 to live on, Not the full 74.70. Telling them to move to somewhere cheaper has no effect and they claim that can manage on 35. But they clearly can't. My reason for the original post was to see if there were some way for the Department to put pressure on them. I know that sounds wrong. Ultimately I guess this is not a benefits issue! But thanks to everyone for responding!0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177K Life & Family
- 257.5K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards