Universal Credit information

Spoonie_Turtle

TheShape said:

I believe I know what the issue is. 

If the OP has a child of 2 years old, I believe I'll be correct.

I'll post what I believe the issue is in a while when I have the opportunity.

They said youngest is under 4 which means they could be 3.  I think I might be suspecting the same thing though, but I don't know what the different commitments are for each group to be certain.

OP if your child is under 3 you're not in the 'all work-related requirements' group so Light Touch doesn't apply to you even with your husband's earnings.  I think you might be in the work preparation group (but others will have to confirm) - how old in years is your youngest child?

I don't know what you do about your work coach requiring you to do things beyond your capacity.  Hopefully others will be able to advise there.

TheShape

Here is what I believe is likely to be the issue.

The OPs husband has sufficient earnings to exceed the couples AET and this would usually move the claimant to Light Touch.

I suspect the OP has a child of 2 years old.  A claimant with a 2 year old would usually be placed in the Work Preparation Group with the Commitments that the OP has shown above.

According to legislation the Work Preparation Group has a lower level of requirements than Light touch so the system places the claimant in the Work Preparation Group with work preparation requirements (as the system believes it is placing the claimant in the work group with the lowest possible level of requirements).

In practice however, the Light Touch work group is treated as not having work related requirements.

In practice, the Work Coach/Jobcentre should treat the claimant as if they were in Light Touch and switch off any work related requirements.  If the circumstances/partner earnings are still above the couple AET when the child turns 3, the system will place the OP in Light Touch.

The OP might like to explain this to their Work Coach.  I do not know if the Work Coach would necessarily understand this though.

loobey2288

TheShape said:

I believe I know what the issue is. 

If the OP has a child of 2 years old, I believe I'll be correct.

I'll post what I believe the issue is in a while when I have the opportunity.

I have a 2 and a 4 year old 

loobey2288

TheShape said:

Here is what I believe is likely to be the issue.

The OPs husband has sufficient earnings to exceed the couples AET and this would usually move the claimant to Light Touch.

I suspect the OP has a child of 2 years old.  A claimant with a 2 year old would usually be placed in the Work Preparation Group with the Commitments that the OP has shown above.

According to legislation the Work Preparation Group has a lower level of requirements than Light touch so the system places the claimant in the Work Preparation Group with work preparation requirements (as the system believes it is placing the claimant in the work group with the lowest possible level of requirements).

In practice however, the Light Touch work group is treated as not having work related requirements.

In practice, the Work Coach/Jobcentre should treat the claimant as if they were in Light Touch and switch off any work related requirements.  If the circumstances/partner earnings are still above the couple AET when the child turns 3, the system will place the OP in Light Touch.

The OP might like to explain this to their Work Coach.  I do not know if the Work Coach would necessarily understand this though.

So basically it's two computer systems working separately from eachother and I'm caught in the middle currently if I'm reading this correctly?
All the while my son is under 2 (till August 2026) I'll be required to be under this work coach regardless of my husbands wages. But once he hits 3 the wages system will go "come over here now!" And the work coach bit switched off? 
Have I understood that correctly? 

Do you think there is anyway of highlighting this to the work coach? That im not looking to return to work and want to be in this light touch regime? Or will that not go down well? 

Thankyou so much all of your for your wonderful clear advice. Honestly it's been such a great support so far. 

peteuk

Here are the expectations 

Age
1 yr                 You will not be expected to work, you will be expected to have regular appointments to discuss a future move into work.

2yr.                 You will not be expected to work, you will be expected to have regular appointments and work activities such as cv writting.

3-12 yrs.          You will be expected to work up to 30 hours of work, or spend this on work related activities such as applying for jobs.

13+.                  You will be expected to work up to 35 hours or spend this on work related activities such as applying for jobs.

loobey2288

peteuk said:

Here are the expectations 

Age
1.  You will not be expected to work, you will be expected to have regular appointments to discuss a future move into work.

2.  You will not be expected to work, you will be expected to have regular appointments and work activities such as cv writting.

3-12 yrs.  You will be expected to work up to 30 hours of work, or spend this on work related activities such as applying for jobs.

13+ You will be expected to work up to 35 hours or spend this on work related activities such as applying for jobs.

Sorry im not sure what you mean. 
Fellow posters have already explained my situation in regards to my children's age and our financial situation. 

Thankyou for your post 

TheShape

loobey2288 said:

TheShape said:

Here is what I believe is likely to be the issue.

The OPs husband has sufficient earnings to exceed the couples AET and this would usually move the claimant to Light Touch.

I suspect the OP has a child of 2 years old.  A claimant with a 2 year old would usually be placed in the Work Preparation Group with the Commitments that the OP has shown above.

According to legislation the Work Preparation Group has a lower level of requirements than Light touch so the system places the claimant in the Work Preparation Group with work preparation requirements (as the system believes it is placing the claimant in the work group with the lowest possible level of requirements).

In practice however, the Light Touch work group is treated as not having work related requirements.

In practice, the Work Coach/Jobcentre should treat the claimant as if they were in Light Touch and switch off any work related requirements.  If the circumstances/partner earnings are still above the couple AET when the child turns 3, the system will place the OP in Light Touch.

The OP might like to explain this to their Work Coach.  I do not know if the Work Coach would necessarily understand this though.

So basically it's two computer systems working separately from eachother and I'm caught in the middle currently if I'm reading this correctly?
All the while my son is under 2 (till August 2026) I'll be required to be under this work coach regardless of my husbands wages. But once he hits 3 the wages system will go "come over here now!" And the work coach bit switched off? 
Have I understood that correctly? 

Do you think there is anyway of highlighting this to the work coach? That im not looking to return to work and want to be in this light touch regime? Or will that not go down well? 

Thankyou so much all of your for your wonderful clear advice. Honestly it's been such a great support so far. 

The computer system is doing what it is expected to but the DWP decided to treat people in Light touch as having no work related requirements.

I would personally just mention that as your husband has earnings above the AET (Administrative Earnings Threshold) you believe that you should be in the Light Touch regime and ask if they could put you in the Light Touch Regime.  They should be able to do this.

(the post above from peteuk just explains the normal requirements for someone with a youngest child of the ages mentioned.  It doesn't take into account earnings).

Yamor

All the above was why I originally asked on the previous page of this thread how old your youngest child was.

Unfortunately, I don't think it will work to ask the work coach to move you to the light touch regime, as suggested by @TheShape.  In my experience, DWP will invariably refuse to put someone in your situation in the light touch regime. And, in fact, they do not have to legally.

If the conditionality being placed on you is too difficult, then you have two options:
1. Swap the main carer from being yourself to your husband. He will be left alone due to his earnings, and you will be put in the light touch regime, and also left alone.
Be aware however, that the basic rule is that you can't change the main carer more than once a year (unless there has been a significant change to your circumstances). However, in practice, I have never seen them refuse to make the change more often than that.

2. When reporting a change of circumstances regarding your children, it is actually possible to not select either of you as the main carer (I think the wording used is "Help me choose" or similar). If you do that, then in practice they don't put either of you down as main carer (they don't in practice actually 'help' you choose!). You should then both be placed in the light touch regime.

huckster

Agree with Yamor, apart from 

1. If they swapped main parent carer, so non working partner goes into light touch, if the working partners earnings do not ideally fall within each AP due to date of wages and AP dates, the danger is the non working partner ends up having weekly Job Centre appointments under intensive work search regime.  They then report change again to say non working partner is main carer again. This could become messy and Job Centre refuse to agree change. It will be seen as reporting changes just to avoid work related appointments.

2. Not selecting main parent carer just leads to Job Centre Work Coach choosing this via claimant commitments, based on claimants circumstances. I don't think the UC system will enter both parents in light touch. A commitments review will be triggered for non working partner.

In the OP's case UC system is working correctly, by treating non working parent of a 2 year old as being in work preparation and Government currently require Job Centres to hold appointments at least once each month.

If the OP is having problems meeting with Job Centre requirements, why don't they just discuss this with Job Centre Work Coach and ask for any reasonable adjustments e.g. appointments by phone calls.

Yamor

huckster said:

1. If they swapped main parent carer, so non working partner goes into light touch, if the working partners earnings do not ideally fall within each AP due to date of wages and AP dates, the danger is the non working partner ends up having weekly Job Centre appointments under intensive work search regime.  They then report change again to say non working partner is main carer again. This could become messy and Job Centre refuse to agree change. It will be seen as reporting changes just to avoid work related appointments.

Agreed. Only go down this route if you are confident that your husband's wages are reported consistently, and come through properly each month to UC.

huckster said:

2. Not selecting main parent carer just leads to Job Centre Work Coach choosing this via claimant commitments, based on claimants circumstances. I don't think the UC system will enter both parents in light touch. A commitments review will be triggered for non working partner.

I have seen literally tens of cases where people have done this, and they have always both been put in the light touch regime. It simply triggers new auto-commitments for the partner who was previously the main carer. Presumably what happens is that the moment you are no longer a main carer, the system sees that you are in light touch, and removes the work coach from your case.
In any event, I don't see any harm in trying this.