Would A Backdated SDP be protected under UC transitional protection?

sillysoup

Hi. It's me again. 

BACKGROUND:

I had my SDP removed from me in August 24th due to "We noted that Miss Blah was due a review of her living arrangements. We stopped her SDP entitlement to prevent any possible overpayments and issued an LTF1 form to Miss Blah." (Even though that last sentence is a lie. I had to phone them up to find out why my payments had changed and I didn't receive LTF1 form until November repeatedly as they said they would send it, but never did because no one did a release form. But tangent over.) 

On January 3rd, it was decided they needed to interview me, which is fine, got nothing to hide, but I have yet to hear anything despite it being labeled as "urgent referral."

I have had the migration notice that I need to claim for UC in April. I originally hoped this would be done and dusted before this date came near but it seems not. I was thinking about asking for an extension on the migration due to this issue as the date creeps closer. 

MAIN QUESTION: 

While talking to someone on the ESA phone line today, I told them I was worried about applying to UC without my disability premium as I thought if I didn't have it at the application stage, the SDP wouldn't fall under transitional protection. And therefore I would miss out on that, which would really hurt my finances. Every penny counts and such lark. Then they told me, if it was approved and backdated (which it should as situation from before hasn't changed.), it would still be protected, because even though it wasn't in place when I made the migration move, I would still be entitled to it. 

Is that the truth? I know sometimes the people on the phones don't quite have the answer. 

I just don't want to lose out as to me, it's a lot for my budget to lose. As I know in the past if you have SDP, you were better off waiting for migration rather than making the jump to UC yourself as you'd be slightly worse off.  

So the actual question is, is it safe to trust in the system (lol) or should I push for extension for migration?

Thanks so much for all the help and I hope you all have lovely evenings. 

huckster

It will probably easier for DWP to delay migration until the SDP is resolved. 

 Yes in theory if you migrated to UC without the SDP issue being resolved, this could be advised to UC at a later date if SDP restored, who could apply any transitional protections as required. I just think it would require you to inform UC of the ESA decision, as I doubt this would be communicated by ESA to UC.

In summary, easier and less likely to go wrong, if migration is delayed. See if DWP will agree to this.

sillysoup

huckster said:

It will probably easier for DWP to delay migration until the SDP is resolved. 

 Yes in theory if you migrated to UC without the SDP issue being resolved, this could be advised to UC at a later date if SDP restored, who could apply any transitional protections as required. I just think it would require you to inform UC of the ESA decision, as I doubt this would be communicated by ESA to UC.

In summary, easier and less likely to go wrong, if migration is delayed. See if DWP will agree to this.

Thank you for your answer. I was leaning this way because I've lost faith in the system that way and I am getting tired of my SDP fight, another fight sounds tiring. My SDP has just hit 7 months since it was stopped and I find that timetable somewhat cruel and slow. I've made 2 phone calls each week since Nov and it hasn't done anything to speed it up (despite all the notes and marks the people on the ESA phoneline do) so I don't have much faith in them fixing that in a timely period, considering "Urgent" to them means atleast 2 months will pass. 

I'm just hoping they'll give me an extension and hope they understand my problem. I just hope it gets fix within the extended timeframe. 

Thanks again. Your comment was helpful Hope you have a nice day.