UC by 2024

Spoonie_Turtle

andrewmp said:

NedS said:

andrewmp said:

NedS said:

andrewmp said:

Yes, students will lose out massively.

I've been banging this drum for a while, but kept being told I was wrong.  I know someone who will lose over £1k a month when she is migrated.

Yes, the government view it as plugging a loophole that should never have existed in the first place. Students are expected to support themselves through the loans, grants and bursaries that are otherwise available to them, not to be supported by the tax payer through the benefits system.

Unlikely to lose over £1k per month though, as there will be TP protection on the overall entitlement, and deductions for student income after disregards are unlikely to exceed £1k per month unless the maintenance grant is huge?

From my calculations she will be worse off and lose all TC.

Her student income is currently disregarded and it's circa £15k per annum.  That'll be unearned income and reduce the UC 1:1, barring a small allowed deduction.

It's not as simple as that. Some of the £15k may be initially disregarded depending what it has been awarded for, and from whom. Typically, only grants and loans for maintenance of the claimant are included and some not fully. Then we must consider if they are included over the full year, or only over APs falling within term time and excluding the long summer vacation, so deductions may be split over 9 or 10 months with full UC payable in the remainder. Then there is the £110 monthly disregard to consider.

I have no doubt they will be worse off, but the by how much will be in the fine details and will depend on many other factors.

£15k is £1.5k per month over the 10 month period.

Remove the £110pm disregard and you're still looking at £1390 per month unearned income.  Even if they deduct the PLA grant of around £160pm (they might) it still sounds like a total loss of benefit to me.  Where am I going wrong?  She'll be delighted if I'm wrong.

They both work really hard and she's trying to better herself, it'll be such a shame if they lose out. I think she's hoping to work when she finished so probably won't recoup her losses then.

I think - could be wrong - this is exactly what transitional protection is for, it tops up the UC to the same level of her TC.

andrewmp

Spoonie_Turtle said:

andrewmp said:

NedS said:

andrewmp said:

NedS said:

andrewmp said:

Yes, students will lose out massively.

I've been banging this drum for a while, but kept being told I was wrong.  I know someone who will lose over £1k a month when she is migrated.

Yes, the government view it as plugging a loophole that should never have existed in the first place. Students are expected to support themselves through the loans, grants and bursaries that are otherwise available to them, not to be supported by the tax payer through the benefits system.

Unlikely to lose over £1k per month though, as there will be TP protection on the overall entitlement, and deductions for student income after disregards are unlikely to exceed £1k per month unless the maintenance grant is huge?

From my calculations she will be worse off and lose all TC.

Her student income is currently disregarded and it's circa £15k per annum.  That'll be unearned income and reduce the UC 1:1, barring a small allowed deduction.

It's not as simple as that. Some of the £15k may be initially disregarded depending what it has been awarded for, and from whom. Typically, only grants and loans for maintenance of the claimant are included and some not fully. Then we must consider if they are included over the full year, or only over APs falling within term time and excluding the long summer vacation, so deductions may be split over 9 or 10 months with full UC payable in the remainder. Then there is the £110 monthly disregard to consider.

I have no doubt they will be worse off, but the by how much will be in the fine details and will depend on many other factors.

£15k is £1.5k per month over the 10 month period.

Remove the £110pm disregard and you're still looking at £1390 per month unearned income.  Even if they deduct the PLA grant of around £160pm (they might) it still sounds like a total loss of benefit to me.  Where am I going wrong?  She'll be delighted if I'm wrong.

They both work really hard and she's trying to better herself, it'll be such a shame if they lose out. I think she's hoping to work when she finished so probably won't recoup her losses then.

I think - could be wrong - this is exactly what transitional protection is for, it tops up the UC to the same level of her TC.

That's what they want the public to think happens.

It isn't what happens, sadly.  There will be winners (I don't have a problem with that because as long as nobody is worse off it achieves the promise), but also huge losers - most current students.

You'll see stories in the press soon, sad faces etc.  Sadly it'll probably be too late to fix a broken safety net.

Spoonie_Turtle

andrewmp said:

Spoonie_Turtle said:

andrewmp said:

NedS said:

andrewmp said:

NedS said:

andrewmp said:

Yes, students will lose out massively.

I've been banging this drum for a while, but kept being told I was wrong.  I know someone who will lose over £1k a month when she is migrated.

Yes, the government view it as plugging a loophole that should never have existed in the first place. Students are expected to support themselves through the loans, grants and bursaries that are otherwise available to them, not to be supported by the tax payer through the benefits system.

Unlikely to lose over £1k per month though, as there will be TP protection on the overall entitlement, and deductions for student income after disregards are unlikely to exceed £1k per month unless the maintenance grant is huge?

From my calculations she will be worse off and lose all TC.

Her student income is currently disregarded and it's circa £15k per annum.  That'll be unearned income and reduce the UC 1:1, barring a small allowed deduction.

It's not as simple as that. Some of the £15k may be initially disregarded depending what it has been awarded for, and from whom. Typically, only grants and loans for maintenance of the claimant are included and some not fully. Then we must consider if they are included over the full year, or only over APs falling within term time and excluding the long summer vacation, so deductions may be split over 9 or 10 months with full UC payable in the remainder. Then there is the £110 monthly disregard to consider.

I have no doubt they will be worse off, but the by how much will be in the fine details and will depend on many other factors.

£15k is £1.5k per month over the 10 month period.

Remove the £110pm disregard and you're still looking at £1390 per month unearned income.  Even if they deduct the PLA grant of around £160pm (they might) it still sounds like a total loss of benefit to me.  Where am I going wrong?  She'll be delighted if I'm wrong.

They both work really hard and she's trying to better herself, it'll be such a shame if they lose out. I think she's hoping to work when she finished so probably won't recoup her losses then.

I think - could be wrong - this is exactly what transitional protection is for, it tops up the UC to the same level of her TC.

That's what they want the public to think happens.

It isn't what happens, sadly.  There will be winners (I don't have a problem with that because as long as nobody is worse off it achieves the promise), but also huge losers - most current students.

You'll see stories in the press soon, sad faces etc.  Sadly it'll probably be too late to fix a broken safety net.

I'm confused, why isn't it happening for people in the managed migration?

andrewmp

Spoonie_Turtle said:

andrewmp said:

Spoonie_Turtle said:

andrewmp said:

NedS said:

andrewmp said:

NedS said:

andrewmp said:

Yes, students will lose out massively.

I've been banging this drum for a while, but kept being told I was wrong.  I know someone who will lose over £1k a month when she is migrated.

Yes, the government view it as plugging a loophole that should never have existed in the first place. Students are expected to support themselves through the loans, grants and bursaries that are otherwise available to them, not to be supported by the tax payer through the benefits system.

Unlikely to lose over £1k per month though, as there will be TP protection on the overall entitlement, and deductions for student income after disregards are unlikely to exceed £1k per month unless the maintenance grant is huge?

From my calculations she will be worse off and lose all TC.

Her student income is currently disregarded and it's circa £15k per annum.  That'll be unearned income and reduce the UC 1:1, barring a small allowed deduction.

It's not as simple as that. Some of the £15k may be initially disregarded depending what it has been awarded for, and from whom. Typically, only grants and loans for maintenance of the claimant are included and some not fully. Then we must consider if they are included over the full year, or only over APs falling within term time and excluding the long summer vacation, so deductions may be split over 9 or 10 months with full UC payable in the remainder. Then there is the £110 monthly disregard to consider.

I have no doubt they will be worse off, but the by how much will be in the fine details and will depend on many other factors.

£15k is £1.5k per month over the 10 month period.

Remove the £110pm disregard and you're still looking at £1390 per month unearned income.  Even if they deduct the PLA grant of around £160pm (they might) it still sounds like a total loss of benefit to me.  Where am I going wrong?  She'll be delighted if I'm wrong.

They both work really hard and she's trying to better herself, it'll be such a shame if they lose out. I think she's hoping to work when she finished so probably won't recoup her losses then.

I think - could be wrong - this is exactly what transitional protection is for, it tops up the UC to the same level of her TC.

That's what they want the public to think happens.

It isn't what happens, sadly.  There will be winners (I don't have a problem with that because as long as nobody is worse off it achieves the promise), but also huge losers - most current students.

You'll see stories in the press soon, sad faces etc.  Sadly it'll probably be too late to fix a broken safety net.

I'm confused, why isn't it happening for people in the managed migration?

I'm not sure.  From what others have said it's done on purpose because they don't want students to qualify for benefits.  I don't know.

It's certainly misleading to suggest that nobody will be worse off when migrating, when pretty much every student claiming tax credits will be worse off.

Apparently they scored in the first plsce, so it's all good.

NedS

Spoonie_Turtle said:

andrewmp said:

Spoonie_Turtle said:

andrewmp said:

NedS said:

andrewmp said:

NedS said:

andrewmp said:

Yes, students will lose out massively.

I've been banging this drum for a while, but kept being told I was wrong.  I know someone who will lose over £1k a month when she is migrated.

Yes, the government view it as plugging a loophole that should never have existed in the first place. Students are expected to support themselves through the loans, grants and bursaries that are otherwise available to them, not to be supported by the tax payer through the benefits system.

Unlikely to lose over £1k per month though, as there will be TP protection on the overall entitlement, and deductions for student income after disregards are unlikely to exceed £1k per month unless the maintenance grant is huge?

From my calculations she will be worse off and lose all TC.

Her student income is currently disregarded and it's circa £15k per annum.  That'll be unearned income and reduce the UC 1:1, barring a small allowed deduction.

It's not as simple as that. Some of the £15k may be initially disregarded depending what it has been awarded for, and from whom. Typically, only grants and loans for maintenance of the claimant are included and some not fully. Then we must consider if they are included over the full year, or only over APs falling within term time and excluding the long summer vacation, so deductions may be split over 9 or 10 months with full UC payable in the remainder. Then there is the £110 monthly disregard to consider.

I have no doubt they will be worse off, but the by how much will be in the fine details and will depend on many other factors.

£15k is £1.5k per month over the 10 month period.

Remove the £110pm disregard and you're still looking at £1390 per month unearned income.  Even if they deduct the PLA grant of around £160pm (they might) it still sounds like a total loss of benefit to me.  Where am I going wrong?  She'll be delighted if I'm wrong.

They both work really hard and she's trying to better herself, it'll be such a shame if they lose out. I think she's hoping to work when she finished so probably won't recoup her losses then.

I think - could be wrong - this is exactly what transitional protection is for, it tops up the UC to the same level of her TC.

That's what they want the public to think happens.

It isn't what happens, sadly.  There will be winners (I don't have a problem with that because as long as nobody is worse off it achieves the promise), but also huge losers - most current students.

You'll see stories in the press soon, sad faces etc.  Sadly it'll probably be too late to fix a broken safety net.

I'm confused, why isn't it happening for people in the managed migration?

If I can give an example to help explain (made up numbers):

Say a claimant, such as andrewmp's friend, gets £1000/month at the moment on combined legacy benefits and they migrate to UC.

But the UC amount before any deductions would only be £900, they will get an additional Transitional Protection element of £100 on their UC statement each month to make up the difference, that will gradually be eroded over time as the original £900 gets increased each year by inflation. So their UC entitlement will start out at the same £1000/month, made up of £900 + £100 TP. They will be no worse off.

Then come April, inflation is 5% and UC is uprated by that, so the £900 becomes £945 with the 5% uplift, and the TP erodes to £55/month keeping the overall UC at £1000/month. Next year, inflation is again 5% and the £945 is uprated to £992.25 and the TP falls to £7.75, and so it continues until the TP is eroded away by inflation or the claimant loses it due to a change of circumstance.

But, in the case of a student, their £1000 UC entitlement (including TP) is calculated before their student income is taken into account, which is then deducted. So if they had £10,000 / year student income for maintenance, paid over 10 APs from Oct to July, during those 10 APs, £10,000/10 - £110 disregard = £890/month student income would be deducted. So their entitlement to UC would be (£1000 - £890 = £110) £110/month for 10 months and £1000/month for the other 2 months.

Transitional Protection does not help them as student income is considered after the TP is applied, and the reason for the anomaly is that on Tax Credits, student income was totally ignored (a bit like capital) and students essentially received double funding.

The Government / UC policy are very aware of the issue and they are considering what, if any, mitigations to put in place but for now it would appear they view this as closing of a loophole that should never have existed in the first place. Put simply, UC does not exist to support students (there are loans, grants and bursaries for that)

Spoonie_Turtle

NedS said:

Spoonie_Turtle said:

andrewmp said:

Spoonie_Turtle said:

andrewmp said:

NedS said:

andrewmp said:

NedS said:

andrewmp said:

Yes, students will lose out massively.

I've been banging this drum for a while, but kept being told I was wrong.  I know someone who will lose over £1k a month when she is migrated.

Yes, the government view it as plugging a loophole that should never have existed in the first place. Students are expected to support themselves through the loans, grants and bursaries that are otherwise available to them, not to be supported by the tax payer through the benefits system.

Unlikely to lose over £1k per month though, as there will be TP protection on the overall entitlement, and deductions for student income after disregards are unlikely to exceed £1k per month unless the maintenance grant is huge?

From my calculations she will be worse off and lose all TC.

Her student income is currently disregarded and it's circa £15k per annum.  That'll be unearned income and reduce the UC 1:1, barring a small allowed deduction.

It's not as simple as that. Some of the £15k may be initially disregarded depending what it has been awarded for, and from whom. Typically, only grants and loans for maintenance of the claimant are included and some not fully. Then we must consider if they are included over the full year, or only over APs falling within term time and excluding the long summer vacation, so deductions may be split over 9 or 10 months with full UC payable in the remainder. Then there is the £110 monthly disregard to consider.

I have no doubt they will be worse off, but the by how much will be in the fine details and will depend on many other factors.

£15k is £1.5k per month over the 10 month period.

Remove the £110pm disregard and you're still looking at £1390 per month unearned income.  Even if they deduct the PLA grant of around £160pm (they might) it still sounds like a total loss of benefit to me.  Where am I going wrong?  She'll be delighted if I'm wrong.

They both work really hard and she's trying to better herself, it'll be such a shame if they lose out. I think she's hoping to work when she finished so probably won't recoup her losses then.

I think - could be wrong - this is exactly what transitional protection is for, it tops up the UC to the same level of her TC.

That's what they want the public to think happens.

It isn't what happens, sadly.  There will be winners (I don't have a problem with that because as long as nobody is worse off it achieves the promise), but also huge losers - most current students.

You'll see stories in the press soon, sad faces etc.  Sadly it'll probably be too late to fix a broken safety net.

I'm confused, why isn't it happening for people in the managed migration

But, in the case of a student, their £1000 UC entitlement (including TP) is calculated before their student income is taken into account, which is then deducted. So if they had £10,000 / year student income for maintenance, paid over 10 APs from Oct to July, during those 10 APs, £10,000/10 - £110 disregard = £890/month student income would be deducted. So their entitlement to UC would be (£1000 - £890 = £110) £110/month for 10 months and £1000/month for the other 2 months.

Transitional Protection does not help them as student income is considered after the TP is applied, and the reason for the anomaly is that on Tax Credits, student income was totally ignored (a bit like capital) and students essentially received double funding.

Ah I see, yes that's exactly the bit I was missing.  Thanks.  That's bizarre - are any other people having income accounted for after the TP is applied, or only students?

NedS

Spoonie_Turtle said:

NedS said:

Spoonie_Turtle said:

andrewmp said:

Spoonie_Turtle said:

andrewmp said:

NedS said:

andrewmp said:

NedS said:

andrewmp said:

Yes, students will lose out massively.

I've been banging this drum for a while, but kept being told I was wrong.  I know someone who will lose over £1k a month when she is migrated.

Yes, the government view it as plugging a loophole that should never have existed in the first place. Students are expected to support themselves through the loans, grants and bursaries that are otherwise available to them, not to be supported by the tax payer through the benefits system.

Unlikely to lose over £1k per month though, as there will be TP protection on the overall entitlement, and deductions for student income after disregards are unlikely to exceed £1k per month unless the maintenance grant is huge?

From my calculations she will be worse off and lose all TC.

Her student income is currently disregarded and it's circa £15k per annum.  That'll be unearned income and reduce the UC 1:1, barring a small allowed deduction.

It's not as simple as that. Some of the £15k may be initially disregarded depending what it has been awarded for, and from whom. Typically, only grants and loans for maintenance of the claimant are included and some not fully. Then we must consider if they are included over the full year, or only over APs falling within term time and excluding the long summer vacation, so deductions may be split over 9 or 10 months with full UC payable in the remainder. Then there is the £110 monthly disregard to consider.

I have no doubt they will be worse off, but the by how much will be in the fine details and will depend on many other factors.

£15k is £1.5k per month over the 10 month period.

Remove the £110pm disregard and you're still looking at £1390 per month unearned income.  Even if they deduct the PLA grant of around £160pm (they might) it still sounds like a total loss of benefit to me.  Where am I going wrong?  She'll be delighted if I'm wrong.

They both work really hard and she's trying to better herself, it'll be such a shame if they lose out. I think she's hoping to work when she finished so probably won't recoup her losses then.

I think - could be wrong - this is exactly what transitional protection is for, it tops up the UC to the same level of her TC.

That's what they want the public to think happens.

It isn't what happens, sadly.  There will be winners (I don't have a problem with that because as long as nobody is worse off it achieves the promise), but also huge losers - most current students.

You'll see stories in the press soon, sad faces etc.  Sadly it'll probably be too late to fix a broken safety net.

I'm confused, why isn't it happening for people in the managed migration

But, in the case of a student, their £1000 UC entitlement (including TP) is calculated before their student income is taken into account, which is then deducted. So if they had £10,000 / year student income for maintenance, paid over 10 APs from Oct to July, during those 10 APs, £10,000/10 - £110 disregard = £890/month student income would be deducted. So their entitlement to UC would be (£1000 - £890 = £110) £110/month for 10 months and £1000/month for the other 2 months.

Transitional Protection does not help them as student income is considered after the TP is applied, and the reason for the anomaly is that on Tax Credits, student income was totally ignored (a bit like capital) and students essentially received double funding.

Ah I see, yes that's exactly the bit I was missing.  Thanks.  That's bizarre - are any other people having income accounted for after the TP is applied, or only students?

Yes, all income is accounted for after TP is applied - that's how UC works, and how TC works too as maximum entitlement is then tapered by income.

Think of TP as just another element making up the total entitlement before deductions on a UC claim - like the standard allowance, housing element, child element, LCWRA or carers element etc. It's just another line on the UC statement (for £100 in my example above), making up the total UC entitlement before any deductions.

The only difference with the TP element is that it does not increase with uprating (it erodes), and it ends upon certain changes in circumstance.

andrewmp

Transitional protection is supposed to ensure that nobody is worse off at the point of transitioning to UC from legacy benefits.

Lots of students will be lots worse off the minute they claim, therefore it's not fit for purpose.

My friend probably won't claim, there's no point. No doubt someone looking at the stats will wonder why.

Yamor

Although it is true that the tool used by DWP to calculate the transitional element does not take into account any student income (meaning that claimants with student loans will be worse off), it is very important to realise that this does not comply with the regulations, which are clear that the transitional element should be calculated taking into account any student income.
As such, anyone who finds themselves in this situation should be immediately requesting a mandatory reconsideration (followed by an appeal if necessary) on the decision made about their entitlement for their first AP, on the grounds that the transitional element has been wrongly calculated.

kaMelo

Yamor said:

Although it is true that the tool used by DWP to calculate the transitional element does not take into account any student income (meaning that claimants with student loans will be worse off), it is very important to realise that this does not comply with the regulations, which are clear that the transitional element should be calculated taking into account any student income.
As such, anyone who finds themselves in this situation should be immediately requesting a mandatory reconsideration (followed by an appeal if necessary) on the decision made about their entitlement for their first AP, on the grounds that the transitional element has been wrongly calculated.

No it doesn't. Under UC every claimant, even those who have transitional protection, is still subject to deductions for income. The anomaly occurs as student loans were never considered income under tax credits, leading to students who qualified for tax credits being treated more favourably, especially compared to students who didn't qualify for tax credits.
All UC does is remove their advantageous position.