LCWRA changes.

Rubyroobs

Does anyone have any links to the changes on LCWRA amount after April 2026. I know things will only change for new claimants. 
As I understand it people with serious lifelong conditions will get the highest rate and those who are end of life.
Does anyone know whether people going through extensive treatment for example for cancer will get the higher rate ? I know they are automatically awarded LCWRA usually just by completing the UC50. I'm struggling to find much guidance on this. If anyone has any links I'd be grateful.

HillStreetBlues

Rubyroobs said:

Does anyone have any links to the changes on LCWRA amount after April 2026. I know things will only change for new claimants. 
As I understand it people with serious lifelong conditions will get the highest rate and those who are end of life.
Does anyone know whether people going through extensive treatment for example for cancer will get the higher rate ? I know they are automatically awarded LCWRA usually just by completing the UC50. I'm struggling to find much guidance on this. If anyone has any links I'd be grateful.

It's called severe conditions' criteria (SCC) and is a very high bar
https://data.parliament.uk/DepositedPapers/Files/DEP2025-0364/160._Severe_Conditions-Guidance_V3.0.pdf

Rubyroobs

Thanks that's really helpful.

Ms_Wheels

This is an interesting document. The document says:

• Following a day 1, day 29 or routine Work Capability Assessment (WCA) made on or after 29 September 2017 where the healthcare professional (HCP) advises that a claimant has LCWRA, they will also advise if the claimant meets the Severe Conditions criteria.

Does this mean that a claimant who has LCWRA before 2017, could also met the severe conditions criteria at their next WCA? 

I've just migrated from ESA to UC (not yet received first UC payment). I've had LCWRA since I was moved to ESA (from income support) and my last WCA review was in 2016/early 2017. I think I would met the severe conditions criteria. 

itsthelittlethings

I know you're not supposed to comment on policy but this is so counter productive as who would ever take a job when on LCWRA knowing what they could reclaim?

HillStreetBlues

Ms_Wheels said:

This is an interesting document. The document says:

• Following a day 1, day 29 or routine Work Capability Assessment (WCA) made on or after 29 September 2017 where the healthcare professional (HCP) advises that a claimant has LCWRA, they will also advise if the claimant meets the Severe Conditions criteria.

Does this mean that a claimant who has LCWRA before 2017, could also met the severe conditions criteria at their next WCA? 

I've just migrated from ESA to UC (not yet received first UC payment). I've had LCWRA since I was moved to ESA (from income support) and my last WCA review was in 2016/early 2017. I think I would met the severe conditions criteria. 

A person can meet the SCC at any assessment, if they do there will be no further assessments unless the claimant informs the DWP of improvement.

Spoonie_Turtle

itsthelittlethings said:

I know you're not supposed to comment on policy but this is so counter productive as who would ever take a job when on LCWRA knowing what they could reclaim?

People who find part-time work that suits them and understand how it works, that you don't automatically lose LCWRA or your entire UC claim?

Having LCWRA on your claim generally means (albeit situation-dependent) you can earn a LOT more before there is nil UC payable.

Just for ease of illustration, take a single person no dependents.
- Standard allowance £400.14 which means earnings of £727.53 would nil their claim.
- Plus LCWRA 423.27 = £823.41 which by itself would mean nil UC at £1497.11
- BUT add on the work allowance, £684 in this instance (no rent) = they can earn up to £2181.10 - at which point UC payable would be 1p, but the claim would still be open.

The amount they can earn is higher if the max UC award is higher due to being a couple, housing element, child element, etc.

Basically at minimum the LCWRA element currently means someone can earn an extra £769.58 per month before their UC payment is nilled on top of what they could already earn without it.  And potentially much more if it gives them the work allowance, if they don't have children and didn't have LCW.

Plenty of jobs pay below those levels, especially if someone can only work very limited hours due to their health.

itsthelittlethings

Spoonie_Turtle said:

itsthelittlethings said:

I know you're not supposed to comment on policy but this is so counter productive as who would ever take a job when on LCWRA knowing what they could reclaim?

People who find part-time work that suits them and understand how it works, that you don't automatically lose LCWRA or your entire UC claim?

Having LCWRA on your claim generally means (albeit situation-dependent) you can earn a LOT more before there is nil UC payable.

Just for ease of illustration, take a single person no dependents.
- Standard allowance £400.14 which means earnings of £727.53 would nil their claim.
- Plus LCWRA 423.27 = £823.41 which by itself would mean nil UC at £1497.11
- BUT add on the work allowance, £684 in this instance (no rent) = they can earn up to £2181.10 - at which point UC payable would be 1p, but the claim would still be open.

The amount they can earn is higher if the max UC award is higher due to being a couple, housing element, child element, etc.

Basically at minimum the LCWRA element currently means someone can earn an extra £769.58 per month before their UC payment is nilled on top of what they could already earn without it.  And potentially much more if it gives them the work allowance, if they don't have children and didn't have LCW.

Plenty of jobs pay below those levels, especially if someone can only work very limited hours due to their health.

Good thinking. So you’re limited to £24,000 plus PIP. Sounds fair.

Altior

Are all those earnings net? So in theory, someone on UC LCWRA could earn a lot more than that, gross, and contribute to a pension within the same AP (staying within pension legislation). 

itsthelittlethings

Altior said:

Are all those earnings net? So in theory, someone on UC LCWRA could earn a lot more than that, gross, and contribute to a pension within the same AP (staying within pension legislation). 

The UC is net, I think. The earnings are taxed but you would get the benefit of your personal allowance.

If you genuinely have LRCWRA I struggle to see how you could really sustain more than around 8 hours a week long term.

Altior

itsthelittlethings said:

Altior said:

Are all those earnings net? So in theory, someone on UC LCWRA could earn a lot more than that, gross, and contribute to a pension within the same AP (staying within pension legislation). 

The UC is net, I think. The earnings are taxed but you would get the benefit of your personal allowance.

If you genuinely have LRCWRA I struggle to see how you could really sustain more than around 8 hours a week long term.

Ye, they are taxed but contributions are relievable, so contributions get +25% by default. From what I have read it's very beneficial to contribute to pension whilst on any type of UC. There are of course wider considerations like benefits after passing state pension access age, and the marginal tax rate when income is drawn from the pension.

As is my life now, I recently read all 228 pages of the WCA Handbook! One of my take outs from this was that the HCP general 'advice' to DMs (I'm not sure that is correct way to describe it, they are seemingly not meant to lead the witness so to speak), is to look on the possibility of working favourably for all applicants. Especially in regard to positive mental health impacts. Where it is feasible with adjustments etc.

So purely theoretical yes. But I feel it would be reasonable to assume that working is compatible with LCWRA, where circumstances allow. I appreciate there will be individuals on LCWRA where any type of work is impossible.