# Universal Credit



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 19, 2020)

When my sons worked disappeared back in March due to the coronavirus he was owed money for work he had done, but as the companies he worked for were closed and all employees furloughed they are only now able to pay him for that work.   Further - One of the companies made him redundant last week and a few days ago said they’d pay him what they owed him for work done before they closed down back in March and will pay him for 22days holiday he had not taken as he had been working flat out for them for a year.  He had not taken ANY holiday.

All of this was for employment and work done before lockdown and well before he applied for UC.  He is being told that any money he gets for any of that work will count as income NOW so if next month he gets say £500 for work done not paid and holiday pay - then he will lose £500 of next Months UC. This seems so staggering wrong it is unbelievable that the DWP could have set the system up to do that.  Well actually it’s not but it seems shocking that this is what looks like will happen.

Does anyone know.  This is so unfair it is astonishing. Surely the system should be able to recognise the difference - it’s not as if UC is generous.  If he had got paid on time it would not have counted but they couldn’t as the government wouldn’t permit it to happen.

that he was eventually going to get paid for work done in February was great news as he is really struggling - and a few hundred pounds would have really helped -  but it’s seems it’s all just going to disappear as if he’d never actually worked.

I’ll add that I understand why in normal circumstances this would be the way it is set up.  Government wants to push people into work of UC and so UC payments levels are set to be barely sufficient to scrape through a month on.  But the current unemployment circumstances are not normal - and it was government law that stopped the companies paying my son before he was anywhere near claiming UC.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Jul 19, 2020)

UC is there to cover you when you have no income or income below a level deemed too little to manage on. When he gets this back dated money it is classed as current income. He therefore does not need the state to support him, he can support himself. Why should the state support him, and others, when for this period he has his own money?

This is a regular complaint for you but I think you really need to take a step back and think about what UC is there to do. You need to understand it's purpose.

Incidentally, there was nothing stopping any company paying its bills during lockdown, other than a total lack of money. Even if everyone was furloughed directors were able to carry out basic functions. An organised company would also have organised payments to happen before furloughing staff. Companies have hidden behind furlough for non payment of bills. Those who have tried that with us are now finding they are having to pay upfront for any orders.


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 19, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			UC is there to cover you when you have no income or income below a level deemed too little to manage on. When he gets this back dated money it is classed as current income. He therefore does not need the state to support him, he can support himself. Why should the state support him, and others, when for this period he has his own money?

This is a regular complaint for you but I think you really need to take a step back and think about what UC is there to do. You need to understand it's purpose.
		
Click to expand...

The UC system isn't fit for purpose 

Constant mistakes and leaves people on the brink..

Someone we know used to work with young people (under 25) who needed help with UC etc in hostels so have heard all the stories of how their left for weeks with zero money to pay for food and the hostel until it's sorted

Friend of mine posted this on FB other day 

"I lowered my hours to work around my son so now I only work 22 & half hours a week on a low income, I usually get £26 every Saturday towards housing rent, today I got  paid 50 pence! 😂 🤦‍♀️"

The system is broke. The system it replaced cost more ofc but least people didn't actually suffer as bad


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Jul 19, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			The UC system isn't fit for purpose 

Constant mistakes and leaves people on the brink..

Someone we know used to work with young people (under 25) who needed help with UC etc in hostels so have heard all the stories of how their left for weeks with zero money to pay for food and the hostel until it's sorted

Friend of mine posted this on FB other day 

"I lowered my hours to work around my son so now I only work 22 & half hours a week on a low income, I usually get £26 every Saturday towards housing rent, today I got  paid 50 pence! 😂 🤦‍♀️"

The system is broke. The system it replaced cost more ofc but least people didn't actually suffer as bad
		
Click to expand...

I'm not claiming it works as it should, only what the concept is. In the case of the OP it sounds as though it is working as it should, he just doesn't like it.

The delays in receiving initial payments are long established and the fact those problems are still happening is a major scandal. UC was trialled regionally for a period of years and for these issues not to be addressed is mind blowingly incompetent to me.


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 19, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			I'm not claiming it works as it should, only what the concept is. In the case of the OP it sounds as though it is working as it should, he just doesn't like it.

The delays in receiving initial payments are long established and the fact those problems are still happening is a major scandal. UC was trialled regionally for a period of years and for these issues not to be addressed is mind blowingly incompetent to me.
		
Click to expand...

Would be better off deferring the money if he could until off UC so it's an actual use otherwise it's just the same money but u are no longer owed any back pay 

Not ideal ofc


----------



## Captainron (Jul 19, 2020)

What sort of work was your lad doing prior to lockdown?

Sounds a bit like construction to me and if that’s the case then he will be back working at full capacity in no time. 

So many people being stuck at home with a reasonable income and hardly any silly spending. Looking at their homes and going. I hate that. That needs doing etc and now they can afford it. All my builder/chippie/sparky etc mates are flat out now


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 19, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			Would be better off deferring the money if he could until off UC so it's an actual use otherwise it's just the same money but u are no longer owed any back pay 

Not ideal ofc
		
Click to expand...

Good idea.  Though the risk is high that both companies that owe him money will go bust...

I get what @LT says about the purpose of UC - but these are extraordinary times and in such times the level of UC is such that individuals really struggle, that is OK when there is loads of work available and claimants just need to get off their backsides so won’t be struggling on UC for long - but there isn’t the work.

And don’t forget that if his company had been allowed by the government to pay him for work done then that earning would not have counted in his UC payment calc.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Jul 19, 2020)

In what way did the govt prevent him from being paid for work done?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 19, 2020)

Captainron said:



			What sort of work was your lad doing prior to lockdown?

Sounds a bit like construction to me and if that’s the case then he will be back working at full capacity in no time. 

So many people being stuck at home with a reasonable income and hardly any silly spending. Looking at their homes and going. I hate that. That needs doing etc and now they can afford it. All my builder/chippie/sparky etc mates are flat out now
		
Click to expand...

Performing arts, Nightclub management and DJing; Venue coordination for touring bands and other acts/artists. All gone and no idea at all when it might restart.  Recent government relaxations don’t apply.

We know of one self-employed bloke who has bought himself a Porsche with money from one of the government schemes. Makes you pretty sick at the inequality in many of our systems and our society.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 19, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			In what way did the govt prevent him from being paid for work done?
		
Click to expand...

The companies were closed and all staff furloughed so they were not allowed by law to do any work - and so not allowed to process payments to employees - especially when the employers had to first work out how much to pay him. Though you suggest that not the case.  It may also have been the fact that the companies had zero income...and they generally work on very small margins.


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 19, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			The companies were closed and all staff furloughed so they were not allowed by law to do any work - and so not allowed to process payments to employees - especially when the employers had to first work out how much to pay him.
		
Click to expand...

Did he try and get work in Tesco or something to see him through? They were hiring loads at the time could have been helpful


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 19, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Good idea.  Though the risk is high that both companies that owe him money will go bust...

I get what @LT says about the purpose of UC - but these are extraordinary times and in such times the level of UC is such that individuals really struggle, that is OK when there is loads of work available and claimants just need to get off their backsides so won’t be struggling on UC for long - but there isn’t the work.

And don’t forget that if his company had been allowed by the government to pay him for work done then that earning would not have counted in his UC payment calc.
		
Click to expand...

I'd say it's zero risk tbh. If his UC is going to go and he ends up with the Same level of money then risk it and keep the money on hold .. if it goes he is in the same position


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Jul 19, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			The companies were closed and all staff furloughed so they were not allowed by law to do any work - and so not allowed to process payments to employees - especially when the employers had to first work out how much to pay him.
		
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but that doesn't stand up. They could easily have organised payments before closing. Directors were allowed to carry out certain duties to maintain the functioning of the company, they were not allowed to carry out work that would generate income. Paying bills, staff etc comes into that. Incidentally,  when on furlough companies pay their staff and then reclaim it from the govt. The companies your son worked for have been paying their staff, no reason why they could not pay him at the same time other than to manage their own cash flow. 

Delay in receiving payments is down to the firms concerned, not the govt.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 19, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			I'm sorry but that doesn't stand up. They could easily have organised payments before closing. Directors were allowed to carry out certain duties to maintain the functioning of the company, they were not allowed to carry out work that would generate income. Paying bills, staff etc comes into that. Incidentally,  when on furlough companies pay their staff and then reclaim it from the govt. The companies your son worked for have been paying their staff, no reason why they could not pay him at the same time other than to manage their own cash flow. 

Delay in receiving payments is down to the firms concerned, not the govt.
		
Click to expand...

But they didn’t. For whatever reason.  This was work from before he registered for UC as everyone being put in his situation by the lockdown was encouraged by the government to do - get registered immediately for UC while work closed due to lockdown.  He took that advice but by not being asked by DWP when registering if he was owed money and not warned what that would mean if he got it - he is being penalised.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 19, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			I'd say it's zero risk tbh. If his UC is going to go and he ends up with the Same level of money then risk it and keep the money on hold .. if it goes he is in the same position
		
Click to expand...

I will get him to try and do that 👍


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 19, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			Did he try and get work in Tesco or something to see him through? They were hiring loads at the time could have been helpful
		
Click to expand...

Not quite so easy in Sheffield...but no - he didn’t - he thought that things would be getting back to normal by May...remember that? And he was chasing money he was owed that would see him through.


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 19, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Not quite so easy in Sheffield...but no - he didn’t - he thought that things would be getting back to normal by May...remember that? And he was chasing money he was owed that would see him through.
		
Click to expand...

Too easy for me to say looking back but personally would have been straight down Tesco for some work until it all blew over . Even 2 months missing money would annoy me. Even though I could afford it I wouldn't like my savings to go


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Jul 19, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			But they didn’t. For whatever reason.  This was work from before he registered for UC as everyone being put in his situation by the lockdown was encouraged by the government to do - get registered immediately for UC while work closed due to lockdown.  He took that advice but by not being asked by DWP when registering if he was owed money and not warned what that would mean if he got it - he is being penalised.
		
Click to expand...

I get the annoyance but it should be directed at the companies owing him money, not the govt. It is their tardiness, I am being kind there, in not paying him that has caused the issue. They are hiding behind a poor excuse for why his payment was delayed. If they had been on time then the problem does not exist.


----------



## jim8flog (Jul 19, 2020)

Nothing has really changed under UC. I have lost my job on more the one occasion in my life and what I was paid as a final payment e.g. redundancy payment was always taken in to consideration when claiming the benefit appropriate to that time period.


----------



## Wolf (Jul 19, 2020)

UC isn't a great system granted, but in no way is it the government's fault the companies he worked for didn't pay him, likewise it isn't their fault he is getting a delayed payment from them which is having a knock effect to his benefit. UC is designed to take into account his current financial situation only not past, so if he receives £500 in the current month then that is his current situation regardless of which month it was earned in.

There are many flaws in UC granted and it needs huge areas of improvement, but the fault here lies solely with the employer not making payments as they should have and were not stopped doing so by government, furlough was put in to support companies paying staff, if the company chose not to do so then they are solely accountable. Likewise as another poster pointed out he like others would have had opportunity to seek work in tesco etc and you have acknowledged he chose not to do so, I can understand he thought it'd blow over but again that was his choice not the governments fault.

I can sympathise with his plight having been made redundant in past and being on UC, but it's purely a safety net to help until back into work and any income can and should be taken into account.


----------



## Fromtherough (Jul 19, 2020)

If your son had received the money at the time, would he have qualified for UC when he claimed the benefit? If not then he actually hasn’t lost out anything. The system is not ideal, but in place to support those that need it most. This boost in his income, even if only a one off, should be factored in and means the state shouldn’t need to support him for the period in which he receives it - not earns it.

To attempt to wait for this to blow over is more than a bit blasé. If you’re capable of working and you don’t try, suggests a lot about a person. A few of my self employed friends were diddled over the government support. One of them for cashing in a pension. He is a joiner and instead of claiming government support, went out and picked fruit, delivered takeaways and worked in a supermarket. He’s 56 and could have seen some of these as demeaning, but he didn’t. My respect for him went through the roof. Perhaps if your son had a similar ethic, he would be receiving this back pay and could view it as a bonus, rather than a restriction in his state funded benefit. That sounds a little harsh, but I think that is the actual reality of the situation.


----------



## Griffsters (Jul 19, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			We know of one self-employed bloke who has bought himself a Porsche with money from one of the government schemes. Makes you pretty sick at the inequality in many of our systems and our society.
		
Click to expand...

This reminds me of one of our neighbours who let slip government money, supposedly to help them through tough times, is paying for a new driveway.

It frustrates me how often I see in our society those that already have resources help themselves to money that is supposed to help those much worse off. Simply because they know how to work it. Trickle down economy? My arse.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 19, 2020)

He’s allowed money in savings so put it in savings.


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Jul 19, 2020)

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the whole thing, but I thought furloughing of staff was what companies did with their PAYE staff, but the UC use was for the self employed as a means of some support?
So if I am right (often not) why are the 2 words being used in the one situation?


----------



## chrisd (Jul 19, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			and it was government law that stopped the companies paying my son before he was anywhere near claiming UC.
		
Click to expand...

The Directors of Companies were entitled to pay wages owed even if those Directors were themselves furloughed, but I expect it'll be Boris's fault - it always is


----------



## Papas1982 (Jul 19, 2020)

I think the fact you’ve admitted he didn’t look for readily available work shows that whatever the government do, unless it’s guarantee him a job in gigs it won’t be enough For him.

Most people don’t do the dream job they had as a kid. Now if you or your parents can afford to let you follow your dreams. Perfect. But if not, then get in the real world and do what pay the bills. 

I accept that’s a harsh response, but this clearly plays on your mind as You’ve had 3/4 threads about it. There comes a time when all others have been blamed.......


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 19, 2020)

If you've loaned him money can he use the money to repay you?


----------



## Blue in Munich (Jul 19, 2020)

Papas1982 said:



			I think the fact you’ve admitted he didn’t look for readily available work shows that whatever the government do, unless it’s guarantee him a job in gigs it won’t be enough For him.

*Most people don’t do the dream job they had as a kid*. Now if you or your parents can afford to let you follow your dreams. Perfect. But if not, then get in the real world and do what pay the bills.

I accept that’s a harsh response, but this clearly plays on your mind as You’ve had 3/4 threads about it. There comes a time when all others have been blamed.......
		
Click to expand...

He has at least had a taste of his dream job in gigs, which is more than many of us get.  And as there currently are no gigs, I'm afraid that for the time being the reality is taking a mundane job like the rest of us or accept the lifestyle that Universal Credit provides.


----------



## chellie (Jul 19, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Performing arts, Nightclub management and DJing; Venue coordination for touring bands and other acts/artists. All gone and no idea at all when it might restart.  Recent government relaxations don’t apply.

We know of one self-employed bloke who has bought himself a Porsche with money from one of the government schemes. Makes you pretty sick at the inequality in many of our systems and our society.
		
Click to expand...

So have you reported him?????


----------



## chellie (Jul 19, 2020)

Traminator said:



			Over the years, I have had some great times and also been in some pretty poor situations, but one thing I have ALWAYS done is gone out and worked.
Often this has involved horrible jobs because I think I have an inbuilt sense of pride in earning a living for myself.

Sorry to say this but I keep seeing a recurring topic of this poor, hard done by young man not getting bailed out by benefits because he can't work in the specific job he wants.   Life doesn't really work like that for most of us.
		
Click to expand...

Well said.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 19, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			The UC system isn't fit for purpose

Constant mistakes and leaves people on the brink..

Someone we know used to work with young people (under 25) who needed help with UC etc in hostels so have heard all the stories of how their left for weeks with zero money to pay for food and the hostel until it's sorted

Friend of mine posted this on FB other day

"I lowered my hours to work around my son so now I only work 22 & half hours a week on a low income, I usually get £26 every Saturday towards housing rent, today I got  paid 50 pence! 😂 🤦‍♀️"

The system is broke. The system it replaced cost more ofc but least people didn't actually suffer as bad
		
Click to expand...

This is not meant as a personal dig, more a reflection on how we as a society have created a situation where we think people under 40 are young, vunerable and in need of nurturing. I accept there are some who have learning difficulties and health issues but when I was 25 I had been married  three years, had a child and was serving in the Navy, at 25 my Dad had been in the Army  8 years and was fighting in Burma, if people think Universal Credit is unfit for purpose then they would have been mortified at the benefit system 30 years ago.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 19, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Not quite so easy in Sheffield...but no - he didn’t - he thought that things would be getting back to normal by May...remember that? And he was chasing money he was owed that would see him through.
		
Click to expand...

Don't see why being in Sheffield makes a difference. Surely they have Tesco's and other supermarkets up there and he could have taken work with them. Surely regular income at a time when it was clear performing arts would be one of the first things to go would have been a sensible choice. Also why hasn't he pursued the money earlier and more vehemently if it was a contractually due. I am sure even during furlough there was capability for the owners to make payments via payroll (they must have been paying the furlough salaries)


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Jul 19, 2020)

chellie said:



			So have you reported him?????
		
Click to expand...

Annoying though it is there is no restriction for what you can spend the money on. It could go into the business, pay for a long haul holiday, buy a car. It's up to the business owner what they do with the money. (I'm not justifying this by the way. We got diddly and find it just as frustrating)


----------



## chrisd (Jul 19, 2020)

Traminator said:



			Over the years, I have had some great times and also been in some pretty poor situations, but one thing I have ALWAYS done is gone out and worked.
Often this has involved horrible jobs because I think I have an inbuilt sense of pride in earning a living for myself.

Sorry to say this but I keep seeing a recurring topic of this poor, hard done by young man not getting bailed out by benefits because he can't work in the specific job he wants.   Life doesn't really work like that for most of us.
		
Click to expand...

Yep, I did my first paper round aged 11 and never had a single day off work unemployed since leaving school


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 19, 2020)

It appears there is a failing in the university education system


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Jul 19, 2020)

We might not agree with his take on it, but SILH is just trying to look out for his family. We can't fault him for that, and whether we agree with his thinking on it all at least he is trying to look after his family.


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 19, 2020)

SocketRocket said:



			This is not meant as a personal dig, more a reflection on how we as a society have created a situation where we think people under 40 are young, vunerable and in need of nurturing. I accept there are some who have learning difficulties and health issues but when I was 25 I had been married  three years, had a child and was serving in the Navy, at 25 my Dad had been in the Army  8 years and was fighting in Burma, if people think Universal Credit is unfit for purpose then they would have been mortified at the benefit system 30 years ago.
		
Click to expand...

Whilst in principle that's correct today's world is rubbish. There aren't jobs for life anymore or careers .. well less and less every day

More and more zero hour jobs, unreliable incomes.. and just more competition for every job out there 

I'm lucky to have a job for life role. However many of my friends and family bounce from job to job until they can find something that should sustained them.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Jul 19, 2020)

Bunkermagnet said:



			We might not agree with his take on it, but SILH is just trying to look out for his family. We can't fault him for that, and whether we agree with his thinking on it all at least he is trying to look after his family.
		
Click to expand...

And there are times when looking after your family involves telling them some hard truths, rather than kissing it better; this appears to be one of them to me.


----------



## chellie (Jul 19, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Annoying though it is there is no restriction for what you can spend the money on. It could go into the business, pay for a long haul holiday, buy a car. It's up to the business owner what they do with the money. (I'm not justifying this by the way. We got diddly and find it just as frustrating)
		
Click to expand...

Were they actually giving away so much money though. I don't know of one self employed person who has got loads of ££££. There is so much rubbish being spouted around on the internet.


----------



## chellie (Jul 19, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			Did he try and get work in Tesco or something to see him through? They were hiring loads at the time could have been helpful
		
Click to expand...

No. A search of other threads will help.


----------



## Kellfire (Jul 19, 2020)

I’m going to say “ok boomer” to pretty much all of this thread.


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Jul 19, 2020)

Blue in Munich said:



			And there are times when looking after your family involves telling them some hard truths, rather than kissing it better; this appears to be one of them to me.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not saying it isn't, all I'm trying to say is that at least he is trying to help his family whether it's the right way or not


----------



## Fromtherough (Jul 19, 2020)

Kellfire said:



			I’m going to say “ok boomer” to pretty much all of this thread.
		
Click to expand...

In what context?


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 19, 2020)

Kellfire said:



			I’m going to say “ok boomer” to pretty much all of this thread.
		
Click to expand...

You could say that to a lot of posts on the forum at times. The "in my day" brigade who don't realise that day has gone. The world is a scarier and harder place now for people to navigate. Covid has made it 100 times worse for that generation.

I'm 33 and I think this is what my 3rd recession? Their suppose to be once in your career.

I feel for My daughters. By time they come to get jobs all careers will be gone. Houses will be impossible to own yet somebody will tell them in their day we just did this so it was fine. 

Like when people say kids are lazy for not walking to school.. in my day I walked 2 miles there and back.. well in your day the schools werent so packed .. now the local school can be 5 miles away on busy roads with direct routes taken out by more and more housing.. 

THE WORLD HAS CHANGED 

Boomers ,😆


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Jul 19, 2020)

chellie said:



			Were they actually giving away so much money though. I don't know of one self employed person who has got loads of ££££. There is so much rubbish being spouted around on the internet.
		
Click to expand...

There were limits all the way so if anyone was getting too carried away or angry then it is probably misplaced. If you were the right size or in a particular segment, retail, leisure and one other I can't remember, possibly tourism, you got a one off payment of £10k per unit, no business rates to pay for the rest of the year. Sounds good but those industries had no income so not a total winner. If someone wants to take that money for themselves then it will be subject to the appropriate tax so they could not simply take all £10k to spend on themselves. 

I've no doubt some people took the money and spent it on non business use for themselves but the system was there to get money to people as quickly as possible and that means no balancing rules could be put in place.


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 19, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			There were limits all the way so if anyone was getting too carried away or angry then it is probably misplaced. If you were the right size or in a particular segment, retail, leisure and one other I can't remember, possibly tourism, you got a one off payment of £10k per unit, no business rates to pay for the rest of the year. Sounds good but those industries had no income so not a total winner. If someone wants to take that money for themselves then it will be subject to the appropriate tax so they could not simply take all £10k to spend on themselves. 

I've no doubt some people took the money and spent it on non business use for themselves but the system was there to get money to people as quickly as possible and that means no balancing rules could be put in place.
		
Click to expand...

They let people carry on working but could claim the grant

For example the guy who did my loft could have claimed (dunno if he did) but he restarted working in may after finishing April as finished a job rather than leave it half done.. yet he will have earned at the same time

Nothing to stop anyone doing that as you don't know if your work might be effected like somebody might cancel a job as they now can't afford it etc 

If at the end your in a better position for it you don't have to give it back!!

When covid hit we took a mortgage holiday incase but the overtime went through roof and I cleared enough to save a nest egg and get a new car .. couldn't have planned that though didn't know if tfl was going bust one min!


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 19, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			Whilst in principle that's correct today's world is rubbish. There aren't jobs for life anymore or careers .. well less and less every day

More and more zero hour jobs, unreliable incomes.. and just more competition for every job out there

I'm lucky to have a job for life role. However many of my friends and family bounce from job to job until they can find something that should sustained them.
		
Click to expand...

I have to say that life for the vast majority of people in this country is better than it has ever been, if you think this is rubbish you wouldnt have liked to live in the past.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 19, 2020)

Kellfire said:



			I’m going to say “ok boomer” to pretty much all of this thread.
		
Click to expand...

Thanks 🤛


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 19, 2020)

SocketRocket said:



			I have to say that life for the vast majority of people in this country is better than it has ever been, if you think this is rubbish you wouldnt have liked to live in the past.
		
Click to expand...

Jobwise it really isn't 

Jobs for life
Gold plated pensions 
Retiring at 55 for some 

You can't tell me what there is now where people have zero hour contracts .. rubbish pensions if any working until 67 

Bouncing from job to job as careers are harder to come by


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 19, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			You could say that to a lot of posts on the forum at times. The "in my day" brigade who don't realise that day has gone. The world is a scarier and harder place now for people to navigate. Covid has made it 100 times worse for that generation.

I'm 33 and I think this is what my 3rd recession? Their suppose to be once in your career.

I feel for My daughters. By time they come to get jobs all careers will be gone. Houses will be impossible to own yet somebody will tell them in their day we just did this so it was fine.

Like when people say kids are lazy for not walking to school.. in my day I walked 2 miles there and back.. well in your day the schools werent so packed .. now the local school can be 5 miles away on busy roads with direct routes taken out by more and more housing..

THE WORLD HAS CHANGED

Boomers ,😆
		
Click to expand...

I dont believe you understand the concept of supply and demand. If people cant afford to buy houses then the price will drop so they can.

Kids arnt naturally lazy,  they are allowed to be by parents who have spoiled them, if their school is 5 miles away they get on a school bus, many parents drive kids to school because the kids expect it. The average class size when I was at school was around 40, is it larger than that today?

YES THE WORLD HAS CHANGED BUT YOU CAN BLAME  THE SOCIETY YOU HAVE CREATED FOR THAT.  My kids didnt get driven to school and neither did I.

Boomers! you dont know how well off you are 🙄


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 19, 2020)

SocketRocket said:



			I dont believe you understand the concept of supply and demand. If people cant afford to buy houses then the price will drop so they can.

Kids arnt naturally lazy they are allowed to be by parents who have spoiled them, if their school is 5 miles away they get on a school bus. The average class size when I was at school was around 40, is it larger than that today?

YES THE WORLD HAS CHANGED BUT YOU CAN BLAME SOCIETY FOR THAT.

Boomers! you dont know how well off you are 🙄
		
Click to expand...

Lol you really think if people can't afford houses the prices will magically drop? Are you actually drunk or just delusional

All the houses get snapped up by people for second homes keeping the prices up for people to create a rental market for somebody else to cream a living off. 

Prices won't drop . The demand will always be there!!! Yet people will struggle to get them and be forced to rent off the people who can afford to stump up the deposit.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 19, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			Jobwise it really isn't

Jobs for life
Gold plated pensions
Retiring at 55 for some

You can't tell me what there is now where people have zero hour contracts .. rubbish pensions if any working until 67

Bouncing from job to job as careers are harder to come by
		
Click to expand...

Only a few jobs were for life, work was hard in the past and if you didnt get your nose down and backside up you were fired, no employment protection laws then.  You talk as if most people are on minimum hours but that's not true and many prefer it anyhow.

No one can deny life is not better now for the majority than it has ever been, what you call tough is just comparitive to what people are used to and now expect as an entitlement.  Regarding pensions, anyone working for the state still have good pensions and it's now compulsary for employers to offer a pension and contribute to it.
Nothing wrong with working longer if you are going to live longer and remember back in my day many left school at 15 and worked to 65, now many dont start a real job until they are in their mid twenties.


----------



## williamalex1 (Jul 19, 2020)

My daughter and ex wife have been stranded here in Scotland since March 13th, the day before lock down. 
They returned here after being resident in Tenerife for almost 10 years, sadly my 77 year old ex wife is now immobile and has advanced dementia and needs specialised care.
  But because of the lock down they've been unable to meet any government officials , social workers or have received any financial assistance.


Makes you wonder how refugees and asylum seekers have managed during this pandemic


----------



## chrisd (Jul 19, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			Jobwise it really isn't

Jobs for life
Gold plated pensions
Retiring at 55 for some

You can't tell me what there is now where people have zero hour contracts .. rubbish pensions if any working until 67

Bouncing from job to job as careers are harder to come by
		
Click to expand...

Truth is though Paul - we were expected  to stay loyal to our employer so, yes, there were jobs for life but now unless you move jobs every few years you're not ambitious  - moving jobs in that way tends to increase pay and bear in mind our fairly frequent recessions 

Most didnt have gold played pensions and most that did had lower wages to compensate  - Council staff, Civil servants etc

The retirement age has always been 65 whilst I worked, yes police,  firemen etc etc retired earlier but it wasnt the norm

Zero hour contracts are more common and do suit some jobs and people's lifestyles and maybe they are not great for everyone but back when I started working you didnt get a contract and could be dismissed without any comebacks


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 19, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			Lol you really think if people can't afford houses the prices will magically drop? Are you actually drunk or just delusional

All the houses get snapped up by people for second homes keeping the prices up for people to create a rental market for somebody else to cream a living off.

Prices won't drop . The demand will always be there!!! Yet people will struggle to get them and be forced to rent off the people who can afford to stump up the deposit.
		
Click to expand...

Supply and demand, read about it, it's not magic.

I'm not drunk or delusional but realistic, give it a try.  

There is absolutely no way 'All the houses' will get snapped up by people for second homes, more and more people buy their own homes but you cant always do it without going without some of the nice things in life to do it.
Prices can drop if  demand drops, it's happened to me, I bought a house once at the market value in one year it had dropped by 35% due to a market collapse in housing prices.

But I guess none of this matters because we are 'BOOMERS'


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 19, 2020)

chrisd said:



			Yep, I did my first paper round aged 11 and never had a single day off work unemployed since leaving school
		
Click to expand...

Snap!  We are Boomers though Chris.


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 20, 2020)

SocketRocket said:



			Supply and demand, read about it, it's not magic.

I'm not drunk or delusional but realistic, give it a try.  

There is absolutely no way 'All the houses' will get snapped up by people for second homes, more and more people buy their own homes but you cant always do it without going without some of the nice things in life to do it.
Prices can drop if  demand drops, it's happened to me, I bought a house once at the market value in one year it had dropped by 35% due to a market collapse in housing prices.

But I guess none of this matters because we are 'BOOMERS'
		
Click to expand...

Again "in your day" posts. You just don't understand modern life

The old going without nice things arguement ... A classic 

Or the waited for a crash to get on the market 

All simple and achievable now.....

Well done you.



SocketRocket said:



			Only a few jobs were for life, work was hard in the past and if you didnt get your nose down and backside up you were fired, no employment protection laws then.  You talk as if most people are on minimum hours but that's not true and many prefer it anyhow.

No one can deny life is not better now for the majority than it has ever been, what you call tough is just comparitive to what people are used to and now expect as an entitlement.  Regarding pensions, anyone working for the state still have good pensions and it's now compulsary for employers to offer a pension and contribute to it.
Nothing wrong with working longer if you are going to live longer and remember back in my day many left school at 15 and worked to 65, now many dont start a real job until they are in their mid twenties.
		
Click to expand...

Workplace pensions are there to replace state pensions long term. The gov will use it as an excuse to bin off that pension as everyone will have one. 



chrisd said:



			Truth is though Paul - we were expected  to stay loyal to our employer so, yes, there were jobs for life but now unless you move jobs every few years you're not ambitious  - moving jobs in that way tends to increase pay and bear in mind our fairly frequent recessions 

Most didnt have gold played pensions and most that did had lower wages to compensate  - Council staff, Civil servants etc

The retirement age has always been 65 whilst I worked, yes police,  firemen etc etc retired earlier but it wasnt the norm

Zero hour contracts are more common and do suit some jobs and people's lifestyles and maybe they are not great for everyone but back when I started working you didnt get a contract and could be dismissed without any comebacks
		
Click to expand...

Pensions were a lot better for sure. My father recently retired from royal mail who ruined his pension.. he was due to get nothing. He tracked down an old pension from when he worked in London .. bear in mind that was 1994 he left that job .. wasn't there that long maybe 10 years? The pension is enough combined with his royal mail one to bring his earnings to just above what he was being paid with royal mail.  He isn't even 65.. so doesnt include his state pension either.

You wouldn't get that now at all.

I am very fortunate.. but I still don't trust what the government will do to pensions in the future. I pay AVCs to boost my already final salary pension just incase they ruin it in 30 years. Many people wouldn't be able to afford to shove money into a pension and AVCs plus afford to live.

Zero hour are great for certain people but that should be limited to students working through uni, people who want flexibility etc. The whole gig economy that's been set up is terrible .

Would like to see the gov back more apprenticeships.. discourage people from unis. Unless you need a degree for your career.. like a Dr .. we need far more tradesmen and other careers ofc who people could learn a trade and earn good money without crippling debt just because "uni life" is the done thing.

Will discourage my girls from uni unless needed. My wife has a degree doesn't use it. I don't have a degree I left at 16 (after my paper round) apprenticeship and never been unemployed since.. don't think one of My friends thought my decision was a good one to turn down the 6th form at My old school. Yet only one of them is paid more than me now but all of them have a huge debt to their name (which one day the gov could say to a bank count it against them for a mortgage imo).

Going back to the future unless my girls become doctors or bankers or something I don't see them owning houses for a long time and only way they could get the deposit is either a grant from the bank of mum and dad or inheritance from the bank of nan and grandad. Which is a depressing thought.


----------



## Kellfire (Jul 20, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			Again "in your day" posts. You just don't understand modern life

The old going without nice things arguement ... A classic

Or the waited for a crash to get on the market

All simple and achievable now.....

Well done you.



Workplace pensions are there to replace state pensions long term. The gov will use it as an excuse to bin off that pension as everyone will have one.



Pensions were a lot better for sure. My father recently retired from royal mail who ruined his pension.. he was due to get nothing. He tracked down an old pension from when he worked in London .. bear in mind that was 1994 he left that job .. wasn't there that long maybe 10 years? The pension is enough combined with his royal mail one to bring his earnings to just above what he was being paid with royal mail.  He isn't even 65.. so doesnt include his state pension either.

You wouldn't get that now at all.

I am very fortunate.. but I still don't trust what the government will do to pensions in the future. I pay AVCs to boost my already final salary pension just incase they ruin it in 30 years. Many people wouldn't be able to afford to shove money into a pension and AVCs plus afford to live.

Zero hour are great for certain people but that should be limited to students working through uni, people who want flexibility etc. The whole gig economy that's been set up is terrible .

Would like to see the gov back more apprenticeships.. discourage people from unis. Unless you need a degree for your career.. like a Dr .. we need far more tradesmen and other careers ofc who people could learn a trade and earn good money without crippling debt just because "uni life" is the done thing.

Will discourage my girls from uni unless needed. My wife has a degree doesn't use it. I don't have a degree I left at 16 (after my paper round) apprenticeship and never been unemployed since.. don't think one of My friends thought my decision was a good one to turn down the 6th form at My old school. Yet only one of them is paid more than me now but all of them have a huge debt to their name (which one day the gov could say to a bank count it against them for a mortgage imo).

Going back to the future unless my girls become doctors or bankers or something I don't see them owning houses for a long time and only way they could get the deposit is either a grant from the bank of mum and dad or inheritance from the bank of nan and grandad. Which is a depressing thought.
		
Click to expand...

But hula hoops and ration books and fish and chips wrapped in newspaper.


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 20, 2020)

Kellfire said:



			But hula hoops and ration books and fish and chips wrapped in newspaper. 

Click to expand...

My friends bf has just had to sell his flat.. the bank wouldn't lend him 80k to buy out his flat mate so he had to sell up and move home to start again.. at 35 .. they are now saving to buy together but are about 10k short will take a while

Another friend of mine who I went to school with.. he went back to teach at our school, has now replacement the head of ICT who stood down to semi retire (my mother lol another story) but even he lives at home at 33 as he just can't afford to get a house on his own. On a good wage In a good career ... He has gone without he has a tone in savings waiting to spend on a house ..

If only life was simple eh


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Jul 20, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			My friends bf has just had to sell his flat.. the bank wouldn't lend him 80k to buy out his flat mate so he had to sell up and move home to start again.. at 35 .. they are now saving to buy together but are about 10k short will take a while

Another friend of mine who I went to school with.. he went back to teach at our school, has now replacement the head of ICT who stood down to semi retire (my mother lol another story) but even he lives at home at 33 as he just can't afford to get a house on his own. On a good wage In a good career ... He has gone without he has a tone in savings waiting to spend on a house ..

If only life was simple eh
		
Click to expand...

It’s very easy to say one era had it better, and being in my 50’s I fall in between those with the golden pensions and newer workplace replacements, but the modern life has so many more things now considered “essential” that years back weren’t around. Mobile phones, cable/ satellite Tv, 3 yr cycle of car ownership the list goes on. 
Yes I agree housing prices are silly, but houses are viewed and used as a commodity rather than a home. Sadly that’s a legacy of the 80’s and Mrs T, just as private pensions being raped for around 30% by the Chancellor of the day Gordon Brown has meant those, like myself, who had put away their own money as we were all told state pensions would be worthless  now have to work for longer. 
There’s better and worse for every generation, and moaning about it or throwing insults at people because they are older or younger than you doesn’t help anyone.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 20, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			Pensions were a lot better for sure. My father recently retired from royal mail who ruined his pension.. he was due to get nothing. He tracked down an old pension from when he worked in London .. bear in mind that was 1994 he left that job .. wasn't there that long maybe 10 years? The pension is enough combined with his royal mail one to bring his earnings to just above what he was being paid with royal mail.  He isn't even 65.. so doesnt include his state pension either.

You wouldn't get that now at all.

I am very fortunate.. but I still don't trust what the government will do to pensions in the future. I pay AVCs to boost my already final salary pension just incase they ruin it in 30 years. Many people wouldn't be able to afford to shove money into a pension and AVCs plus afford to live.

Zero hour are great for certain people but that should be limited to students working through uni, people who want flexibility etc. The whole gig economy that's been set up is terrible .

Would like to see the gov back more apprenticeships.. discourage people from unis. Unless you need a degree for your career.. like a Dr .. we need far more tradesmen and other careers ofc who people could learn a trade and earn good money without crippling debt just because "uni life" is the done thing.

Will discourage my girls from uni unless needed. My wife has a degree doesn't use it. I don't have a degree I left at 16 (after my paper round) apprenticeship and never been unemployed since.. don't think one of My friends thought my decision was a good one to turn down the 6th form at My old school. Yet only one of them is paid more than me now but all of them have a huge debt to their name (which one day the gov could say to a bank count it against them for a mortgage imo).

Going back to the future unless my girls become doctors or bankers or something I don't see them owning houses for a long time and only way they could get the deposit is either a grant from the bank of mum and dad or inheritance from the bank of nan and grandad. Which is a depressing thought.
		
Click to expand...

Honestly Paul I dont think that you can use one pension example and claim it represents the whole. I didn't start to contribute to a pension until the early 1980's and lost a lot of it in the recession of the late 80s when my employer went bust, although I started my own business in 1990 I still never managed a pension that I could wholly live on.

I agree that Uni is a waste for a huge number and that many would be better without the debt and a pretty worthless degree. My son did as you suggest and left school and went to work and now earns more than I could ever have dreamt of.

Zero hour contracts are useful to a range people, where I work everyone is on zero hours and no one has issues with that and no one has lost out as far as I am aware.

I know house buying is difficult but too many that I know want holidays abroad, flash cars, expensive lifestyle AND to buy a house  - you couldn't do it back in my day and you cant now either, and the "Bank of mum and dad" was not opened back then!


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Jul 20, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			They let people carry on working but could claim the grant

For example the guy who did my loft could have claimed (dunno if he did) but he restarted working in may after finishing April as finished a job rather than leave it half done.. yet he will have earned at the same time

Nothing to stop anyone doing that as you don't know if your work might be effected like somebody might cancel a job as they now can't afford it etc 

If at the end your in a better position for it you don't have to give it back!!

When covid hit we took a mortgage holiday incase but the overtime went through roof and I cleared enough to save a nest egg and get a new car .. couldn't have planned that though didn't know if tfl was going bust one min!
		
Click to expand...

Yes, the self employed could keep working if they could whilst getting govt money still. Slightly odd decision but this was decision making on the hoof, trying to help as many as possible, as quickly as possible. They could have made the rules stricter, got them to be justified better but it would have taken months to process and many would have gone bust, had no money to live on.

When you have a catch all scheme there are bound to be some who win more than they should, it is the price to pay to help so many others.


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 20, 2020)

chrisd said:



			Honestly Paul I dont think that you can use one pension example and claim it represents the whole. I didn't start to contribute to a pension until the early 1980's and lost a lot of it in the recession of the late 80s when my employer went bust, although I started my own business in 1990 I still never managed a pension that I could wholly live on.

I agree that Uni is a waste for a huge number and that many would be better without the debt and a pretty worthless degree. My son did as you suggest and left school and went to work and now earns more than I could ever have dreamt of.

Zero hour contracts are useful to a range people, where I work everyone is on zero hours and no one has issues with that and no one has lost out as far as I am aware.

I know house buying is difficult but too many that I know want holidays abroad, flash cars, expensive lifestyle AND to buy a house  - you couldn't do it back in my day and you cant now either, and the "Bank of mum and dad" was not opened back then!
		
Click to expand...

The bank of mum and dad is only open because house prices have become so stupid that parents can afford it now. For example when my parents moved to their current house in 1996 they paid 120k now it's worth 750k. That is truly mental. Then they can play the mortgage game to have a low mortgage against the LTV of the house. Think they ended up with an interest only mortgage of £120 a month with financial investments paying out when the mortgage was due to cover the mortgage. That's basically living rent free £120 that's completely nothing a month for housing

You couldn't do that now at all 

I'm glad we agree on degrees. 70% of them in my opinion are a waste of time and money. I'll use my wife as an example she got a degree to become a teacher, but just become a teaching assistant and never moved up because she saw how teachers are treated and how much they have to do in unpaid work so just thought teaching assistant is come in, go home work. She has this debt now that the gov will write off at age 50 is it? Can't remember but gets written off .. massive debt to society all these unpaid loans 

I agree with the cars leasing is too easy now for sure.. it has been promoted to push up another industry the car makers. Do we need that many new cars a year made? Prob not . But people think oh X amount a month is a good price I can afford this and then it's only X amount more for the flasher car.. it is pathetic when you see the kids round here in there a class mercs .. not one of them can actually afford


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 20, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Yes, the self employed could keep working if they could whilst getting govt money still. Slightly odd decision but this was decision making on the hoof, trying to help as many as possible, as quickly as possible. They could have made the rules stricter, got them to be justified better but it would have taken months to process and many would have gone bust, had no money to live on.

When you have a catch all scheme there are bound to be some who win more than they should, it is the price to pay to help so many others.
		
Click to expand...

Fully agree that the scheme was right in what it did.. brought help in asap. And your neighbour for example. He may have needed the cash as his buisness may have been affected but then wasn't in the end.. it happens. We didn't know how bad it would get. He has every right to use that money to do what he wants .. it will be taxed out of him next year anyways so it's not just going to be completely free


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 20, 2020)

Bunkermagnet said:



			It’s very easy to say one era had it better, and being in my 50’s I fall in between those with the golden pensions and newer workplace replacements, but the modern life has so many more things now considered “essential” that years back weren’t around. Mobile phones, cable/ satellite Tv, 3 yr cycle of car ownership the list goes on. 
Yes I agree housing prices are silly, but houses are viewed and used as a commodity rather than a home. Sadly that’s a legacy of the 80’s and Mrs T, just as private pensions being raped for around 30% by the Chancellor of the day Gordon Brown has meant those, like myself, who had put away their own money as we were all told state pensions would be worthless  now have to work for longer. 
There’s better and worse for every generation, and moaning about it or throwing insults at people because they are older or younger than you doesn’t help anyone.

Click to expand...

Things start to get cheaper in time aswell.. mobile phones are now becoming old news and essiental

My mate at work gets redme phones off Amazon £160 for the phone it's pretty decent. Nothing cost to buy compared to the big brands 

I bought my wife a cheap Huawei £220 does everything my Samsung does .. I'd be tempted to switch myself if trump hadn't influenced our policy and also locked them out of America.. anyways her contract ended .. I got her sim only to go with her new phone £12 a month . Again cheap we chips for what she needs.. 

Too many people want the top rangers without top range budget to go with


----------



## Kellfire (Jul 20, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			My friends bf has just had to sell his flat.. the bank wouldn't lend him 80k to buy out his flat mate so he had to sell up and move home to start again.. at 35 .. they are now saving to buy together but are about 10k short will take a while

Another friend of mine who I went to school with.. he went back to teach at our school, has now replacement the head of ICT who stood down to semi retire (my mother lol another story) but even he lives at home at 33 as he just can't afford to get a house on his own. On a good wage In a good career ... He has gone without he has a tone in savings waiting to spend on a house ..

If only life was simple eh
		
Click to expand...

It’s probably entirely his fault though and he should just get a better job and have less fun in life and get another three jobs if he needs to because he’s a lazy millennial.


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 20, 2020)

Kellfire said:



			It’s probably entirely his fault though and he should just get a better job and have less fun in life and get another three jobs if he needs to because he’s a lazy millennial.
		
Click to expand...

Yeah completely , nothing to do with covid meaning the banks tightened up and refused to take guaranteed overtime into account for the mortgage 

Damn snowflakes


----------



## Fromtherough (Jul 20, 2020)

Kellfire said:



			It’s probably entirely his fault though and he should just get a better job and have less fun in life and get another three jobs if he needs to because he’s a lazy millennial.
		
Click to expand...

What’s your thoughts on the OP though?


----------



## Kellfire (Jul 20, 2020)

Fromtherough said:



			What’s your thoughts on the OP though?
		
Click to expand...

I feel very sorry for the guy as would anyone with a touch of empathy.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 20, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			Again "in your day" posts. You just don't understand modern life

The old going without nice things arguement ... A classic

Or the waited for a crash to get on the market

All simple and achievable now.....

Well done you.



Workplace pensions are there to replace state pensions long term. The gov will use it as an excuse to bin off that pension as everyone will have one.



Pensions were a lot better for sure. My father recently retired from royal mail who ruined his pension.. he was due to get nothing. He tracked down an old pension from when he worked in London .. bear in mind that was 1994 he left that job .. wasn't there that long maybe 10 years? The pension is enough combined with his royal mail one to bring his earnings to just above what he was being paid with royal mail.  He isn't even 65.. so doesnt include his state pension either.

You wouldn't get that now at all.

I am very fortunate.. but I still don't trust what the government will do to pensions in the future. I pay AVCs to boost my already final salary pension just incase they ruin it in 30 years. Many people wouldn't be able to afford to shove money into a pension and AVCs plus afford to live.

Zero hour are great for certain people but that should be limited to students working through uni, people who want flexibility etc. The whole gig economy that's been set up is terrible .

Would like to see the gov back more apprenticeships.. discourage people from unis. Unless you need a degree for your career.. like a Dr .. we need far more tradesmen and other careers ofc who people could learn a trade and earn good money without crippling debt just because "uni life" is the done thing.

Will discourage my girls from uni unless needed. My wife has a degree doesn't use it. I don't have a degree I left at 16 (after my paper round) apprenticeship and never been unemployed since.. don't think one of My friends thought my decision was a good one to turn down the 6th form at My old school. Yet only one of them is paid more than me now but all of them have a huge debt to their name (which one day the gov could say to a bank count it against them for a mortgage imo).

Going back to the future unless my girls become doctors or bankers or something I don't see them owning houses for a long time and only way they could get the deposit is either a grant from the bank of mum and dad or inheritance from the bank of nan and grandad. Which is a depressing thought.
		
Click to expand...

Your Fathers pension he found would not pay out what you're suggesting.  The very best ones allowed 1/60 th of your final salary, so if he worked for 10 years and was earning something in the region of £20,000 ne would get: £20000 × 1/60 × 10  which would be in the region of £3,330 a year or £280 a month.  And that's for the best defined pensions.


----------



## 3offTheTee (Jul 20, 2020)

So sorry for your son’s problems SILH and hope things improve soon. If I remember correctly he had a partner. what is her position with work/Savings family support as I know you have contributed in the past.

Ha stour son made any progress now and what is his plan to recover the money? What is the amount involved; you may prefer not to answer that question. The reason I ask is how much difference would the amount owed have made over a period of 4 months.

Realistically the ’employment‘ he is in is always going to be difficult because of competition/and now COVID and wonder whether he should consider changing direction.


----------



## Swinglowandslow (Jul 20, 2020)

Bunkermagnet said:



			It’s very easy to say one era had it better, and being in my 50’s I fall in between those with the golden pensions and newer workplace replacements, but the modern life has so many more things now considered “essential” that years back weren’t around. Mobile phones, cable/ satellite Tv, 3 yr cycle of car ownership the list goes on.
Yes I agree housing prices are silly, but houses are viewed and used as a commodity rather than a home. Sadly that’s a legacy of the 80’s and Mrs T, just as private pensions being raped for around 30% by the Chancellor of the day Gordon Brown has meant those, like myself, who had put away their own money as we were all told state pensions would be worthless  now have to work for longer.
There’s better and worse for every generation, and moaning about it or throwing insults at people because they are older or younger than you doesn’t help anyone.

Click to expand...

I agree. But, there is a vital difference in one era over the other.
It is indisputable that house prices are now such that, because of deposit requirements, many cannot buy who "back in the day"  (in relatively similar income situations )could have done .
E..g  the couple next door   both working, renting the house, but they can't buy it. Cannot rent *and *save for a deposit .
Another big difference which makes comparisons difficult is the credit scenario.
In my day it was HP.
If you didn't have a third deposit and your disposable income ( as calculated by the seller) wasn't enough to pay it off inside three years, then you didn't get to buy it that way. And what you "bought" wasn't yours until the final payment. It could and would be re possessed if payments weren't kept up.

But most definitely the biggest con has been this " must go to Uni craze".
Bring back non Uni careers, apprenticeships, etc where kids can go out to learn trades and skills, and earn something while doing it, thus seeing what the real world is like. And not being saddled with an awful debt.
I am still wondering what I would have thought of having thousands of pounds debt at such an early age. I almost shudder. But of course that is relating it to circumstance obtaining when I was young😀  Not really relevant, I know.
But nevertheless it seems to me that the young are now conditioned to believe (accept?) that being in debt is fine . Or inevitable!


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Jul 20, 2020)

Swinglowandslow said:



			But most definitely the biggest con has been this " must go to Uni craze".
Bring back non Uni careers, apprenticeships, etc where kids can go out to learn trades and skills, and earn something while doing it, thus seeing what the real world is like. And not being saddled with an awful debt.
I am still wondering what I would have thought of having thousands of pounds debt at such an early age. I almost shudder. But of course that is relating it to circumstance obtaining when I was young😀  Not really relevant, I know.
But nevertheless it seems to me that the young are now conditioned to believe (accept?) that being in debt is fine . Or inevitable!
		
Click to expand...

Ah, but it is not a debt. It is a graduate tax that you only pay if you earn over a certain amount. If you don't earn more than that then you never pay back a penny, as most do not. There may be additional living costs debt that is accumulated but the main debt may never have to be serviced. (Google Martin Lewis and his explanation of this for more)

The idea of debt being fine is across most ages now, not just the young. It would worry the hell out of me but many live with it as part of life. The need to have seems to be greater than the ability to afford.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jul 20, 2020)

SocketRocket said:



			Your Fathers pension he found would not pay out what you're suggesting.  The very best ones allowed 1/60 th of your final salary, so if he worked for 10 years and was earning something in the region of £20,000 ne would get: £20000 × 1/60 × 10  which would be in the region of £3,330 a year or £280 a month.  And that's for the best defined pensions.
		
Click to expand...

Not strictly true. 

The rate of accumulation was not restricted in the manner you describe. The restriction on defined benefits schemes was on the relationship between the pension benefit and Final Pensionable Salary. 

This was basically 2/3 × FPS but could be accumulated by better than 60ths.

Police officers could achieve the maximum benefit in 30 years  pensionable service if I remember correctly. 

BTW for the sake of this discussion I should point out that the majority of employees within the so called "boomer" generation were not  members of Final Salary  schemes. 

That is one of the biggest myths of recent years.


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Jul 20, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			Too many people want the top rangers without top range budget to go with
		
Click to expand...

That is the modern way and definitely a far cry from the “make do and mend” ways of my parents


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jul 20, 2020)

Aren’t these younger generations that seem to be so lucky and have bad attitudes the ones we in the 55-75yr old age bracket created?

Or do we blame our parents?


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 20, 2020)

A 75 year old would be a late starter to father a millennial, but I guess Rod Stewart and Bernie Ecclestone managed it.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 20, 2020)

H



3offTheTee said:



			So sorry for your son’s problems SILH and hope things improve soon. If I remember correctly he had a partner. what is her position with work/Savings family support as I know you have contributed in the past.

Ha stour son made any progress now and what is his plan to recover the money? What is the amount involved; you may prefer not to answer that question. The reason I ask is how much difference would the amount owed have made over a period of 4 months.

Realistically the ’employment‘ he is in is always going to be difficult because of competition/and now COVID and wonder whether he should consider changing direction.
		
Click to expand...

OK - lots of interesting posts.

On this specific question.  My sons partner's family are like a lot of families in the country and cannot afford to provide her with much more that an occasional (every couple of weeks at best) £20 or so.  She continues to look for work.

The concern that I have is that the UC system is a general system designed for normal times - now having to copy with people who find themselves out of work through no fault of their own or of their employer - and in extraordinary times.

My son works for companies in a sector (performing arts/music) that survives on tiny margins - largely as the people working in it are passionate about it.  They require ongoing income to pay their outgoings - they will not have much in reserves - but they are viable businesses because performing arts will never cease (well who would have known  ).  The pandemic and subsequent government measures on lockdown shut down performing arts completely - immediately -* as required by government.*

Now as a result of the immediate lockdown my son did not get paid for work he had done, the detail of why the companies could or did not pay him are irrelevant to my son.  He did not get paid for work he had done.  Let's call it £1000 for 6 weeks work in Jan/Feb.  If paid that would have counted as savings <£6k and so would not have impacted his UC claim. He chased getting paid but got nowhere. 

So a little tweak on UC - and it's simple.  Recognise that for recipients of UC - income earned *before *the lockdown and their loss of work/employment as a result of the lockdown - does not count as income when it is eventually paid.  Extraordinary times - simple measure.


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 20, 2020)

Swinglowandslow said:



			I agree. But, there is a vital difference in one era over the other.
It is indisputable that house prices are now such that, because of deposit requirements, many cannot buy who "back in the day"  (in relatively similar income situations )could have done .
E..g  the couple next door   both working, renting the house, but they can't buy it. Cannot rent *and *save for a deposit .
Another big difference which makes comparisons difficult is the credit scenario.
In my day it was HP.
If you didn't have a third deposit and your disposable income ( as calculated by the seller) wasn't enough to pay it off inside three years, then you didn't get to buy it that way. And what you "bought" wasn't yours until the final payment. It could and would be re possessed if payments weren't kept up.

But most definitely the biggest con has been this " must go to Uni craze".
Bring back non Uni careers, apprenticeships, etc where kids can go out to learn trades and skills, and earn something while doing it, thus seeing what the real world is like. And not being saddled with an awful debt.
I am still wondering what I would have thought of having thousands of pounds debt at such an early age. I almost shudder. But of course that is relating it to circumstance obtaining when I was young😀  Not really relevant, I know.
But nevertheless it seems to me that the young are now conditioned to believe (accept?) that being in debt is fine . Or inevitable!
		
Click to expand...

Very true on so many points, think now if you did try and start a career who could afford to buy a house at 20 with the wages they could get? 

They would have to rent and then would be trapped in the rental market for years


----------



## Fromtherough (Jul 20, 2020)

Kellfire said:



			I feel very sorry for the guy as would anyone with a touch of empathy.
		
Click to expand...

I empathise with anyone who is struggling. I struggle to sympathise with those who potentially could get themselves out of a situation, or at least try to, but opt not to.


----------



## GB72 (Jul 20, 2020)

Just a spot of hope for those struggling. Wife has had a hard time of this. She is a health and safety contractor. As she was a director of her own company, she missed out on self employed relief and so could only furlough herself on her basic pay without dividends so, basically, about £500 a month. Still, with a bit of tweaking here and there and after 4 months, she has just got a job back at the level and salary she was on before so all good now. It has taken 4 months of hard work to get there though. 

As for the house thing, I feel too many expect to start out in their dream home in their dream place. Back in the late 90s, I could not afford what I wanted so I moved around, making a little on each property after a couple of years until I could get the place I wanted, where I wanted. Started in a little 1 bed Q home in not the best area and moved up steadily from there.


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 20, 2020)

Fromtherough said:



			I empathise with anyone who is struggling. I struggle to sympathise with those who potentially could get themselves out of a situation, or at least try to, but opt not to.
		
Click to expand...

Whilst I agree , it was a poorly handled start to the furlough in the sense the gov semi lock down.. advised people to avoid shows etc meaning people didnt get refunds etcs because the theatres were open.. but also they said right all PAYE are furlough etc , took a few weeks to sort out self employed. His son might have been In a bit of limbo if they were going to get help or not


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 20, 2020)

GB72 said:



			As for the house thing, I feel too many expect to start out in their dream home in their dream place. Back in the late 90s, I could not afford what I wanted so I moved around, making a little on each property after a couple of years until I could get the place I wanted, where I wanted. Started in a little 1 bed Q home in not the best area and moved up steadily from there.
		
Click to expand...

I find people still do the same 

Certainly in my circles 

All starter houses in areas they didn't really want etc


----------



## Slab (Jul 20, 2020)

Although in a different country, during lockdown I ran payroll almost normally from home each month and the only impact was they had to wait to get printed payslips till the office reopened. Strange your sons employers could not or chose not, to do this 

I wonder how many ppl in the UK fall into this scenario of not being paid a salary by current/past employers for several months


----------



## GB72 (Jul 20, 2020)

Slab said:



			Although in a different country, during lockdown I ran payroll almost normally from home each month and the only impact was they had to wait to get printed payslips till the office reopened. Strange your sons employers could not or chose not, to do this

I wonder how many ppl in the UK fall into this scenario of not being paid a salary by current/past employers for several months
		
Click to expand...

This had me a but confused as well. The furlough scheme made payments to the company and companies paid their staff as normal from my understanding. There was no restriction on companies carrying out administrative duties and furloughed staff were only stopped form doing work that made money for the firm. As such, all payroll activities should carry on as normal.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Jul 20, 2020)

Slab said:



			Although in a different country, during lockdown I ran payroll almost normally from home each month and the only impact was they had to wait to get printed payslips till the office reopened. Strange your sons employers could not or chose not, to do this

I wonder how many ppl in the UK fall into this scenario of not being paid a salary by current/past employers for several months
		
Click to expand...

I hope SILH doesn't mind me answering this but I believe his son was not an employee. He was a self employed contractor. They hire him to do a job, he invoices for it, they pay the invoice. The problem is they chose not to pay him until recently rather than months ago when it was due.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 20, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			Whilst I agree , it was a poorly handled start to the furlough in the sense the gov semi lock down.. advised people to avoid shows etc meaning people didnt get refunds etcs because the theatres were open.. but also they said right all PAYE are furlough etc , took a few weeks to sort out self employed. His son might have been In a bit of limbo if they were going to get help or not
		
Click to expand...

This is correct - he had no idea what the situation was going to be - the money he is owed was as self-employed...


----------



## Slab (Jul 20, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			I hope SILH doesn't mind me answering this but I believe his son was not an employee. He was a self employed contractor. They hire him to do a job, he invoices for it, they pay the invoice. The problem is they chose not to pay him until recently rather than months ago when it was due.
		
Click to expand...

You know i kinda wondered that when I was typing but in the OP he talks about his son being made _redundant_ and _employment work_ etc, which you wouldn't expect to hear used for a contractor because they are _not_ an employee & don't have employee rights (not that it gets him his cash) 

But notwithstanding his status, I still paid the company invoices & bills all throughout lockdown too, from rent for offices we didn't use though to broadband and utilities plus the seasonal/casual labour I was using, all paid online and we're by no means a large company or cash rich. And since I don't believe there was any UK Gov announcement/instruction telling businesses to cease or hold payments due to be paid out to contractors or other suppliers for goods, services or work done, it must mean the businesses have done this to him off their own backs 

(although I'm not sure where his sons 'employers' have now found funds to pay him that they didn't have 4 months ago, its not like gigs are back)


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 20, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			I hope SILH doesn't mind me answering this but I believe his son was not an employee. He was a self employed contractor. They hire him to do a job, he invoices for it, they pay the invoice. The problem is they chose not to pay him until recently rather than months ago when it was due.
		
Click to expand...

This is correct.  He invoiced but for whatever reason and with everything shut down he got nowhere getting his invoice paid.   Whether the business _chose _to not pay him, or whether they felt they were not able or even allowed to pay him he does not know.

Bottom line is that the company still has not paid him, though he is hopeful, and he is now in debt with no means of repaying it if his UC is cut according to the amount of payment of his invoice coming in - if and when it eventually does.

Separately a company he was employed by (quite separate from his self-employed work) has said they will pay him the couple of hundred pounds they owe him for his work before the lockdown and he was furloughed and before he registered for UC (he is on zero hours with them and that is pro rata).  They have also said they'll pay him for holiday he was due but had not taken.  His understanding is that his UC will be knocked down for that also.  Again - payment he was was due and had earned.   And if when he registered for UC he had been asked if he was due any monies coming in and told the impact on anything he might qualify for then he might have waited.  But then he'd still be waiting.

It's really rubbish.  If you have up to £6k - or to a less extent between £6k and £16k, in savings, then the circumstances my lad finds himself in brought about by the lockdown might not hurt you that much if you have to claim UC.  Besides you have some savings to fall back upon.  But when you have no savings and depend upon income at the end of one month to live the next it's really grim.


----------



## GB72 (Jul 20, 2020)

As a self employed contractor, was there not an entitlement to government payments based on past earnings as an alternative to the furlough scheme. My wife missed out on that as she was technically an employee of her own company and so she could only claim furlough payments based on what she had paid herself as salary and not dividends. Still, she knew the risk of that set up (even greater with the changes to IR35 next year) and so she had made sure that that she kept funds aside to cover a period where she could not find her next contract.

That said, this is a conversation my wife and I had before she became a contractor as there was always the risk that the next contract may be some time in coming. She always agreed that, if she did not have enough funding behind her to pay what would be her wages, she would be working in pubs, supermarkets etc until the next contract came in. 

Sadly, as a contractor, you have to be prepared for what you are going to do if there is a period without a new contract. Experience has shown me that there can be a number of very lean months even without a pandemic and, despite how much my wife wants to keep on as a contractor, she has realised that now is not the time to be doing it.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 20, 2020)

Slab said:



			You know i kinda wondered that when I was typing but in the OP he talks about his son being made _redundant_ and _employment work_ etc, which you wouldn't expect to hear used for a contractor because they are _not_ an employee & don't have employee rights (not that it gets him his cash)

But notwithstanding his status, I still paid the company invoices & bills all throughout lockdown too, from rent for offices we didn't use though to broadband and utilities plus the seasonal/casual labour I was using, all paid online and we're by no means a large company or cash rich. And since I don't believe there was any UK Gov announcement/instruction telling businesses to cease or hold payments due to be paid out to contractors or other suppliers for goods, services or work done, *it must mean the businesses have done this to him off their own backs*

(although I'm not sure where his sons 'employers' have now found funds to pay him that they didn't have 4 months ago, its not like gigs are back)
		
Click to expand...

This may be the case.  But as the businesses may have had very little cash in the bank and zero income they could just try and string things out.  Unfortunately the popular music events and nightclubs business is not known to be the most caring towards those it employs either as employees or as contractors.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 20, 2020)

GB72 said:



			As a self employed contractor, was there not an entitlement to government payments based on past earnings as an alternative to the furlough scheme. My wife missed out on that as she was technically an employee of her own company and so she could only claim furlough payments based on what she had paid herself as salary and not dividends. Still, she knew the risk of that set up (even greater with the changes to IR35 next year) and so she had made sure that that she kept funds aside to cover a period where she could not find her next contract.

That said, this is a conversation my wife and I had before she became a contractor as there was always the risk that the next contract may be some time in coming. She always agreed that, if she did not have enough funding behind her to pay what would be her wages, she would be working in pubs, supermarkets etc until the next contract came in.

Sadly, as a contractor, you have to be prepared for what you are going to do if there is a period without a new contract. Experience has shown me that there can be a number of very lean months even without a pandemic and, despite how much my wife wants to keep on as a contractor, she has realised that now is not the time to be doing it.
		
Click to expand...

All true but this was not lack of work, this was payment for work done.  Besides.  The government could tweak the UC system if it so wanted.


----------



## Slab (Jul 20, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			This may be the case.  But as the businesses may have had very little cash in the bank and zero income they could just try and string things out.  Unfortunately the popular music events and nightclubs business is not known to be the most caring towards those it employs either as employees or as contractors.
		
Click to expand...

In one sense it sucks that this delayed 'wage' will impact the UC and he missed out on the opportunity to call it 'savings'
on the other hand would he have ever had the opportunity to do that even if they had paid him within 28 days of him submitting his invoice?

From what I read as soon as he applied for UC any income after that date may impact the UC amount so unlike a salaried  employee it means that the last invoice he submitted was always going to have a potential impact to UC even if they paid out after just a couple of weeks


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Jul 20, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			This is correct.  He invoiced but for whatever reason and with everything shut down he got nowhere getting his invoice paid.   *Whether the business chose to not pay him, or whether they felt they were not able or even allowed to pay him he does not know.*

Bottom line is that the company still has not paid him, though he is hopeful, and he is now in debt with no means of repaying it if his UC is cut according to the amount of payment of his invoice coming in - if and when it eventually does.
		
Click to expand...

In terms of the part in bold it is either point one or two. Three is not a factor, you can rule that out. The reality is it is point one. They will have prioritised their payments and sadly your son has been bounced down the line. The annoying thing is that he is not yet able to take them to the small claims court as the govt has put a hold on that for the time being, or it certainly had. That has allowed companies to avoid paying bills with no options for those owed money to force their hand. It will be worth him checking to see if that has been changed and if so he needs to fill in a form online and get the ball rolling. It is simple to do, if allowed again.


----------



## drdel (Jul 20, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			This may be the case.  But as the businesses may have had very little cash in the bank and zero income they could just try and string things out.  Unfortunately the popular music events and nightclubs business is not known to be the most caring towards those it employs either as employees or as contractors.
		
Click to expand...

I apologise if my recollection is wrong but didn't you raise the issue of your son's income last year and posters advised then that he needed to consider a change from the 'arts' field as it was an unreliable industry of feast and famine?


----------



## chrisd (Jul 20, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			All true but this was not lack of work, this was payment for work done.  Besides.  The government could tweak the UC system if it so wanted.
		
Click to expand...

His only complaint then is with those that owe him the money for work invoiced. The government has nothing to do with his problem


----------



## GB72 (Jul 20, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			All true but this was not lack of work, this was payment for work done.  Besides.  The government could tweak the UC system if it so wanted.
		
Click to expand...

What I mean is that, on the face of it, there was no need for universal credit in the first instance. Being self employed meant that there would be a claim under the furlough scheme based on up to 80% of prior earnings which could be claimed when the current contract ended and it was clear that there was not a further work opportunity coming. As for universal credit, I am not in full agreement. This month he has money coming in and so does not warrant money from the government. Universal credit is meant to put food on the table not deal with debt issues etc, there are other avenues for that.


----------



## jim8flog (Jul 20, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			I'm 33 and I think this is what my 3rd recession?  *Their suppose to be once in your career.*

,😆
		
Click to expand...

I would love to know where that idea came from I am in my late 60s and *financially* due to world and UK circumstances my life has been an absolute roller coaster.

From Wilson's " the pound in your pocket" to the current financial crisis.


----------



## chellie (Jul 20, 2020)

drdel said:



			I apologise if my recollection is wrong but didn't you raise the issue of your son's income last year and posters advised then that he needed to consider a change from the 'arts' field as it was an unreliable industry of feast and famine?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, you are right and also again this year. Apparently it's all someones elses fault he has no money


----------



## Wolf (Jul 20, 2020)

chellie said:



			Yes, you are right and also again this year. Apparently it's all someones elses fault he has no money

Click to expand...

Your forgot it was the year before as well. So been going on for nearly 3 years but every time it's been lack of support from government at fault instead of any self reflection 🤷🏻‍♂️


----------



## drdel (Jul 20, 2020)

jim8flog said:



			I would love to know where that idea came from I am in my late 60s and *financially* due to world and UK circumstances my life has been an absolute roller coaster.

From Wilson's " the pound in your pocket" to the current financial crisis.
		
Click to expand...

and the "Never had it so good" era of Macmillan


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 20, 2020)

Wolf said:



			Your forgot it was the year before as well. So been going on for nearly 3 years but every time it's been lack of support from government at fault instead of any self reflection 🤷🏻‍♂️
		
Click to expand...

I'm torn on this. This year's one is caused by a once in a lifetime proper global pandamic

However could have switched to another job sooner 

I feel for him though if he decides now is enough going to be even harder for jobs


----------



## Wolf (Jul 20, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			I'm torn on this. This year's one is caused by a once in a lifetime proper global pandamic

However could have switched to another job sooner

I feel for him though if he decides now is enough going to be even harder for jobs
		
Click to expand...

As I said in my initial post i have sympathy as UC isn't great, but problem is once again its been highlighted that the issue here is the government, when in fact it really isn't. Acknowledged he didn't seek other means of income and feels changes should be made to suit him when that's not how it works nor should work. Plus it's the companies responsibility to pay him or as a self employed man its his own to chase invoiced payments. Absolutely nothing to do with UC or government. 

It is not an easy time and I wish him well but time has to come when self reflection and change happens inwardly instead of always a woe is me attitude where its always someone else's fault 🤷🏻‍♂️


----------



## Jamesbrown (Jul 20, 2020)

plenty of jobs out there. Always has been. Just nobody wants to do them as they’re perceived beneath them. 
I’ve had 13 jobs at 31. Never been out of work for more than a couple of weeks. 
I even ended up working in a pudding factory in the day and a Wetherspoons at night when I got laid off once.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 20, 2020)

jim8flog said:



			I would love to know where that idea came from I am in my late 60s and *financially* due to world and UK circumstances my life has been an absolute roller coaster.

From Wilson's " the pound in your pocket" to the current financial crisis.
		
Click to expand...

Same here. I started work in 1967 and have been through all sorts of recessions, 3 day week, power outages, mortgage rate rollercoasters etc etc . If fact the last few years, up to the Coronavirus, it's been the longest period that I can remember without a recession


----------



## Wolf (Jul 20, 2020)

Jamesbrown said:



			plenty of jobs out there. Always has been. Just nobody wants to do them as they’re perceived beneath them.
I’ve had 13 jobs at 31. Never been out of work for more than a couple of weeks.
I even ended up working in a pudding factory in the day and a Wetherspoons at night when I got laid off once.
		
Click to expand...

Such a true statement towards so many in society today. Not long after we moved to Lincolnshire I got made redundant, figured I could go back self employed until found something I wanted to really do but knew would take me months to set up client base. As a result I worked in KnowHow as a general bod picking items in the warehouse 4 days a week on 12 hr shifts for national living wage. Then spent the other 3 days working self employed personal training till I got solid work again. Hours were long, boring and job was so dull, but it kept my bills being paid and food in kids bellies.

My mother in law on flip side  got sacked last October for doing something she shouldn't have done at work , hasn't tried to get work since because why should she work in a shop, factory or cleaning and done nothing but blame government for not helping her get a job she isn't qualified for in any other field. But is happy to take the UC payments instead.


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Jul 20, 2020)

Wolf said:



			Such a true statement towards so many in society today. Not long after we moved to Lincolnshire I got made redundant, figured I could go back self employed until found something I wanted to really do but knew would take me months to set up client base. As a result I worked in KnowHow as a general bod picking items in the warehouse 4 days a week on 12 hr shifts for national living wage. Then spent the other 3 days working self employed personal training till I got solid work again. Hours were long, boring and job was so dull, but it kept my bills being paid and food in kids bellies.

*My mother in law on flip side  got sacked last October for doing something she shouldn't have done at work , hasn't tried to get work since because why should she work in a shop, factory or cleaning and done nothing but blame government for not helping her get a job she isn't qualified for in any other field. But is happy to take the UC payments instead*.
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps there above is the rub. The benefit system has been abused by for those capable of not needing it and capable of doing most work.


----------



## Wolf (Jul 20, 2020)

Bunkermagnet said:



			Perhaps there above is the rub. The benefit system has been abused by for those capable of not needing it and capable of doing most work.
		
Click to expand...

Oh indeed there is a huge problem with it, but that's not just UC. It was the same for years before that with JSA, housing and council tax benefits.  That is not a new phenomenon sadly and was one the reasons UC was brought in to replace its predecessors but you'll always get the few ruin it for the many truly in need


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 20, 2020)

Lots of really nice sympathetic folks on here...pretty sad really when many if not most of us enjoy the fruits of the labours of those slogging away in the performing arts sector.

My son and many like him are just looking for a bit of fairness and understanding *in the current circumstances *- when the source of all income for many companies and those employed in the sector *was shut down by the government with one day warning. * He just needs the government to recognise in the UC system that money earned before lockdown need not count against UC entitlement - it can be classified as savings.

If that is unacceptable to some here then they should be calling for the £6k allowance on savings to be scrapped, and then tapering down on savings up to £16k to be scrapped also.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 20, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			I'm torn on this. This year's one is caused by a once in a lifetime proper global pandamic

However could have switched to another job sooner

I feel for him though if he decides now is enough going to be even harder for jobs
		
Click to expand...

As much as i am grateful for words of sympathy - and I truly am given the cynicism and heartlessness of a lot of the posts - this is nothing to do with the nature of my sons employment and it's uncertainty.  Much if not most work in the performing arts sector is no different from my son's work and the sector could not realistically operate any other way.  And it is not a complaint about UC as it operates in a normal economic and jobs environment.

This is about work done and not paid in the context of a global pandemic and a complete shut down *by the government *of the performing arts sector.  Then pull in the fact that you can have up to £6k in savings when you register for UC without that being taken into account - and you can hopefully see the unfairness of it.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 20, 2020)

Jamesbrown said:



			plenty of jobs out there. Always has been. Just nobody wants to do them as they’re perceived beneath them.
I’ve had 13 jobs at 31. Never been out of work for more than a couple of weeks.
I even ended up working in a pudding factory in the day and a Wetherspoons at night when I got laid off once.
		
Click to expand...

Excellent - but in today's jobs and economic climate I suggest it is not going to be as easy as you found it.  Besides.  Not the point of the thread. btw - he's already been investigating what he can move into and jobs available in north Sheffield.  He is getting minimal help from his UC advisor on training schemes he might register for or jobs he can apply for - and that is part of their job.  But he can continue to press, investigate and look himself.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 20, 2020)

Wolf said:



			Oh indeed there is a huge problem with it, but that's not just UC. It was the same for years before that with JSA, housing and council tax benefits.  That is not a new phenomenon sadly and was one the reasons UC was brought in to replace its predecessors but you'll always get the few ruin it for the many truly in need
		
Click to expand...

...and when you are not playing the system or doing jobs on the side?

Just to dispel any misconceptions about the generosity of the system...UC works out for my lad and his partner as about £225/month after rent, Council Tax, Water, Gas and Electricity, broadband, phone and other bills are paid.  And out of that he has to put fuel in a car to get about...as well as food, drinks and all personal and household basics (he doesn't drink but does smoke).  Now as much as some might think, that doesn't actually fund much of a lavish lifestyle for the scroungers.  So you can see how important to him is the £1000 he is owed by his employer that the UC system seems intent on keeping.


----------



## Neilds (Jul 20, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			...and when you are not playing the system or doing jobs on the side?

Just to dispel any misconceptions about the generosity of the system...UC works out for my lad and his partner as about £225/month after rent, Council Tax, Water, Gas and Electricity, broadband, phone and other bills are paid.  And out of that he has to put fuel in a car to get about...as well as food, drinks and all personal and household basics (he doesn't drink but does smoke).  Now as much as some might think, that doesn't actually fund much of a lavish lifestyle for the scroungers.  So you can see how important to him is the £1000 he is owed by his employer that the UC system seems intent on keeping.
		
Click to expand...

If he had been paid on time, he would probably not have been entitled to UC. As he wasn’t paid he would have got UC from the outset and now he has been paid he has a pause in his entitlement and payment will resume next month. In short, he has probably been paid the same amount as in the first case so is actually no worse off.


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 20, 2020)

@SwingsitlikeHogan https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-53477395

Give your lad the heads up


----------



## chellie (Jul 20, 2020)

Aldi want staff https://www.aldirecruitment.co.uk/apply/


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 20, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			As much as i am grateful for words of sympathy - and I truly am given the cynicism and heartlessness of a lot of the posts - this is nothing to do with the nature of my sons employment and it's uncertainty.  Much if not most work in the performing arts sector is no different from my son's work and the sector could not realistically operate any other way.  And it is not a complaint about UC as it operates in a normal economic and jobs environment.

This is about work done and not paid in the context of a global pandemic and a complete shut down *by the government *of the performing arts sector.  Then pull in the fact that you can have up to £6k in savings when you register for UC without that being taken into account - and you can hopefully see the unfairness of it.
		
Click to expand...

So it's another moan at the government instead. I had someone I know on tour, or supposedly, and had played one gig when the pug got pulled. He knew it was coming but effectively had to commit to fulfilling every gig as the promoters and insurance would have had him over a barrel if he had pulled out prior to any government instruction. He knew it was coming but had nothing he could do but pay the band and staff for the dates in full and take the hit. The backstage (roadies/sound guys had already taken precautions and sought alternative arrangements in supermarkets/delivering etc.


----------



## Hobbit (Jul 20, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			...and when you are not playing the system or doing jobs on the side?

Just to dispel any misconceptions about the generosity of the system...UC works out for my lad and his partner as about £225/month after rent, Council Tax, Water, Gas and Electricity, broadband, phone and other bills are paid.  And out of that he has to put fuel in a car to get about...as well as food, drinks and all personal and household basics (he doesn't drink but does smoke).  Now as much as some might think, that doesn't actually fund much of a lavish lifestyle for the scroungers.  So you can see how important to him is the £1000 he is owed by his employer that the UC system seems intent on keeping.
		
Click to expand...

When you first put this post up you said £250/month. Downgraded to improve your argument?

He has £225 a month after all bills are paid... so worth over £1000 a month without having to pay tax and NI, and you’re whining? And you’re whining that the govt aren’t providing him with a training course for his next chosen career?

Ah, the ‘entitled’ argument, and it’s always someone else’s fault....


----------



## Jamesbrown (Jul 20, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Excellent - but in today's jobs and economic climate I suggest it is not going to be as easy as you found it.  Besides.  Not the point of the thread. btw - he's already been investigating what he can move into and jobs available in north Sheffield.  He is getting minimal help from his UC advisor on training schemes he might register for or jobs he can apply for - and that is part of their job.  But he can continue to press, investigate and look himself.
		
Click to expand...

Dig in your pockets, £1600. send your lad on a locksmith course. Within a week he can easily charge £50 (reasonable price) a pop and pretend the cylinders knackered, snap the cylinder and replace. Easy money. Even I’m considering it on top of my normal job.


----------



## Slab (Jul 21, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			This is about work done and not paid in the context of a global pandemic and a complete shut down *by the government *of the performing arts sector. Then pull in the fact that you can have up to £6k in savings when you register for UC without that being taken into account - and you can hopefully see the unfairness of it.
		
Click to expand...


This really is not about _“… work done and not paid in the context of a global pandemic and a complete shut down by the government of the performing arts sector”_

This is about income received after making a claim for UC… end of story

There are millions of different 'circumstances' people find themselves in, the UC system cannot change to take them all into account as they arise

He applied, was assessed and awarded a UC of x amount based on the info he gave about his financial & personal position. Now he will get some money that may/will temporarily reduce the UC, then UC will change again when its ‘spent’

Through poor self management, bad luck or some other circumstance, he did not get one or more invoices paid in a timely manner and that’s a shame it really is, but it does not necessitate a review or restructure of the benefit system, sorry if that’s not the support you want for his predicament but cant you see that if they do this one little thing for him, then when someone else has an equally/more deserving case tomorrow then they must do for them too and the next day and the next?


----------



## HowlingGale (Jul 21, 2020)

Seriously perplexed about the comments that 'boomers' have had it good with their gold plated pensions, buying houses for nothing and they're now worth millions etc.
For the *VAST *majority of people this is simply not true. Using the 'boomers' amongst my family and friends as an example the only ones who have gold plated pensions and have huge equity in expensive houses are the ones who had a really good job that paid well. Much like the 'millenials' nowadays who seem to have it all. It's only the ones who have a good job that pays well.
Most normal folk of whatever generation have/had modest incomes or modest pension that affords them some luxuries but it certainly is not what the 'millennials' would have you believe.
If your parents have lots of money tied up in house equity they are very lucky and are an exception and it is something many, many people can only dream of.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 21, 2020)

Slab said:



			This really is not about _“… work done and not paid in the context of a global pandemic and a complete shut down by the government of the performing arts sector”_

This is about income received after making a claim for UC… end of story

There are millions of different 'circumstances' people find themselves in, the UC system cannot change to take them all into account as they arise

He applied, was assessed and awarded a UC of x amount based on the info he gave about his financial & personal position. Now he will get some money that may/will temporarily reduce the UC, then UC will change again when its ‘spent’

Through poor self management, bad luck or some other circumstance, he did not get one or more invoices paid in a timely manner and that’s a shame it really is, but it does not necessitate a review or restructure of the benefit system, sorry if that’s not the support you want for his predicament but cant you see that if they do this one little thing for him, then when someone else has an equally/more deserving case tomorrow then they must do for them too and the next day and the next?
		
Click to expand...

All I am saying is that the UC system was designed for normal circumstances and economic conditions - neither of which applies to the current situation.

As it happens, as he looks for a way ahead I will not let my lad suffer in misery as a result of a combination of events and circumstances over which he had absolutely no part in or influence.  If it comes to it I will compensate him for the earnings or UC he loses as a result of those earnings... But he is very fortunate - many in his circumstances will not be so.

And so those who look at the situation my son is in and comment on all the things that he could have done - or that he has to put up with and do moving forward - to all of those I say forget that perspective and look at the circumstances of the much less fortunate in the same or similar situation - and then shrug.


----------



## Slab (Jul 21, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			All I am saying is that the UC system was designed for normal circumstances and economic conditions - neither of which applies to the current situation.

As it happens, as he looks for a way ahead I will not let my lad suffer in misery as a result of a combination of events and circumstances over which he had absolutely no part in or influence.  If it comes to it I will compensate him for the earnings or UC he loses as a result of those earnings... But he is very fortunate - many in his circumstances will not be so.

And so those who look at the situation my son is in and comment on all the things that he could have done - or that he has to put up with and do moving forward - *to all of those I say forget that perspective and look at the circumstances of the much less fortunate in the same or similar situation - and then shrug*.
		
Click to expand...

And that's the crux of it. The folks on forums (and almost all online communities & media) generally only care when the situation is on the doorstep


----------



## GB72 (Jul 21, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			All I am saying is that the UC system was designed for normal circumstances and economic conditions - neither of which applies to the current situation.

As it happens, as he looks for a way ahead I will not let my lad suffer in misery as a result of a combination of events and circumstances over which he had absolutely no part in or influence.  If it comes to it I will compensate him for the earnings or UC he loses as a result of those earnings... But he is very fortunate - many in his circumstances will not be so.

And so those who look at the situation my son is in and comment on all the things that he could have done - or that he has to put up with and do moving forward - to all of those I say forget that perspective and look at the circumstances of the much less fortunate in the same or similar situation - and then shrug.
		
Click to expand...

The thing is, whilst the causation in this case is unique, the results are not. I have worked all my life in property and I have seen the housing market collapse on a number of occasions causing widespread redundancies and large parts of the industry effectively close for what is more than a few months. That has not resulted in any specialist measures being put in place or extra funding. I guess you can look all over the place, mining, ship building, steel, construction etc, all of these have seen massive downturns and closures and the most that any government can do is offer careers advice and basis funding.  

Maybe the universal credit system is not perfect but what I am saying is that your son is not the first, nor will be the last, to see their chosen area of work hit hard times or even disappear almost over night. To believe that is a slightly myopic view.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 21, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			All I am saying is that the UC system was designed for normal circumstances and economic conditions - neither of which applies to the current situation.

As it happens, as he looks for a way ahead I will not let my lad suffer in misery as a result of a combination of events and circumstances over which he had absolutely no part in or influence.  If it comes to it I will compensate him for the earnings or UC he loses as a result of those earnings... But he is very fortunate - many in his circumstances will not be so.

And so those who look at the situation my son is in and comment on all the things that he could have done - or that he has to put up with and do moving forward - to all of those I say forget that perspective and look at the circumstances of the much less fortunate in the same or similar situation - and then shrug.
		
Click to expand...

You are of course concerned about your Son and will do what you can to help him through, that's admirable and shows you as being a good and caring parent.

The issue is that if you post his story on a public media site like this others are not emotionally attached so will view his situation at arms length and will tend to give an unemotional response which is what you should expect to happen.

This seems to be a reoccuring situation where you share his latest trials and tribulations and then dont like many of the opinions given. I suggest you dont do this anymore as it always ends up the same way where you take offence from it.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 21, 2020)

SocketRocket said:



			You are of course concerned about your Son and will do what you can to help him through, that's admirable and shows you as being a good and caring parent.

The issue is that if you post his story on a public media site like this others are not emotionally attached so will view his situation at arms length and will tend to give an unemotional response which is what you should expect to happen.

This seems to be a reoccuring situation where you share his latest trials and tribulations and then dont like many of the opinions given. I suggest you dont do this anymore as it always ends up the same way where you take offence from it.
		
Click to expand...

I take no offence to any of the posts.  However some posts lead me to wonder about what _'we are all in this together...' _means when the circumstances of the pandemic and the government's lockdown measures will impact many so very severely.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Jul 21, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



*Not quite so easy in Sheffield*...but no - he didn’t - he thought that things would be getting back to normal by May...remember that? And he was chasing money he was owed that would see him through.
		
Click to expand...

With regard to the bit in bold.....Why? Pretty much all of the supermarkets were recruiting for store staff and drivers and Sheffield was no different to any other part of the country. In fact Aldi are still advertising for store assistants in Sheffield, paying between £9-40 and £10-41 per hour. If your son and his girlfriend only worked 25 hours a week each, at £10 and hour that's £500 a week, which even after tax etc would still be more than they are getting through UC.


----------



## Slab (Jul 21, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I take no offence to any of the posts.  However some posts lead me to wonder about what _'we are all in this together...' _means when the circumstances of the pandemic and the government's lockdown measures will impact many so very severely.
		
Click to expand...

Enough now, you seriously can’t  trot out this_ ‘all in it together’_ nonsense, SILH didn’t care & Slab didn’t care. Your online persona didn’t give a rats bahookie about this pandemic until 9th March. Thousands dead by then, tens of thousands infected and not a peep from any one of us


----------



## GB72 (Jul 21, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I take no offence to any of the posts.  However some posts lead me to wonder about what _'we are all in this together...' _means when the circumstances of the pandemic and the government's lockdown measures will impact many so very severely.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think that any of the comments are meant in a mean spirited way, I guess I, as well as others are realists and look at things a different way and, as mentioned above, have no emotional attachment to the situation. My wife has not worked for over 4 months as construction has been largely shut down, does that entitle her to special provisions as other people could still work. She too was a contractor and so had no furlough or other pay save for a total of £500 a month from the government.

The way I see it, and i guess this makes me harsh, uncaring and various other things, but it is pretty obvious that nightclubs and similar indoor entertainment are, at best, shut until Xmas but that could easily stretch into next year. Universal Credit is seen as a short term solution. It is with this in mind that, if the roles were reversed (and I have been in similar positions in the past), I would be taking any job (or even more than one job) to get me through the next 6-12 months then see if I can pick up my career further down the line when my chosen profession starts to recover. The reality is that his desired career has gone for the foreseeable future and universal credit or any other scheme will not keep him going until it comes back and nor was it ever intended to.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 21, 2020)

I am pretty cool about this.  I just think it a little unfair that one individual can have up to £6k in savings on the day he registers for UC and that £6k does not impact his claim whatsoever - when another - let's say with little or no savings, has some income delayed and it lands a day or a few days after he registers and that income, however little that might be, _does _impact his claim.   

As a result the person _with _savings gets the full UC he is due; the person with _no _savings gets reduced level of UC - and so clearly the person with savings is better positioned to cope with life on UC.

Guess that's how the system has been designed.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jul 21, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I am pretty cool about this.  I just think it a little unfair that one individual can have up to £6k in savings on the day he registers for UC and that £6k does not impact his claim whatsoever - when another - let's say with little or no savings, has some income delayed and it lands a day or a few days after he registers and that income, however little that might be, _does _impact his claim.  

As a result the person _with _savings gets the full UC he is due; the person with _no _savings gets reduced level of UC - and so clearly the person with savings is better positioned to cope with life on UC.

Guess that's how the system has been designed.
		
Click to expand...

If when he registered he had NO SAVINGS surely anything coming whilst he is on UC is Income, tell him to open a savings account and put £25.00 a month or similar in to it, he is allowed to try and save, what NOBODY can do is receive a lump sum and try to state it’s all savings, that would be fraudulent.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 21, 2020)

pauldj42 said:



			If when he registered he had NO SAVINGS surely anything coming whilst he is on UC is Income, tell him to open a savings account and put £25.00 a month or similar in to it, he is allowed to try and save, what NOBODY can do is receive a lump sum and try to state it’s all savings, that would be fraudulent.
		
Click to expand...

Yes - save if possible - easier said than done when your income is just sufficient to scrape along on.  The £1000 income he was due in March was to be what he would use to paid off the debt he has incurred since then as a result of the income being delayed.  Now he has the debt to service.

More likely - and as suggested by another poster - he'll ask the company that owes him the money to delay paying him it until he has a job and has come off UC.


----------



## DanFST (Jul 21, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Yes - save if possible - easier said than done when your income is just sufficient to scrape along on.  The £1000 income he was due in March was to be what he would use to paid off the debt he has incurred since then as a result of the income being delayed.  Now he has the debt to service.

More likely - and as suggested by another poster - he'll ask the company that owes him the money to delay paying him it until he has a job and has come off UC.
		
Click to expand...

Most creditors were offering payment holidays for this exact situation, I know we still are. 

I'm going to assume he didn't call up and ask?


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jul 21, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Yes - save if possible - easier said than done when your income is just sufficient to scrape along on.  The £1000 income he was due in March was to be what he would use to paid off the debt he has incurred since then as a result of the income being delayed.  Now he has the debt to service.

More likely - and as suggested by another poster - he'll ask the company that owes him the money to delay paying him it until he has a job and has come off UC.
		
Click to expand...

It’s nigh on impossible to save when he is as badly off as you say, but I’d rather try and save, even £1.00 per week, than risk benefit fraud.


----------



## GB72 (Jul 21, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Yes - save if possible - easier said than done when your income is just sufficient to scrape along on.  The £1000 income he was due in March was to be what he would use to paid off the debt he has incurred since then as a result of the income being delayed.  Now he has the debt to service.

More likely - and as suggested by another poster - he'll ask the company that owes him the money to delay paying him it until he has a job and has come off UC.
		
Click to expand...

Was the debt declared as part of the application for universal credit. If so, it may have been taken into account as part of the initial calculation.


----------



## marksman (Jul 21, 2020)

Sounds easy doesn’t it ? Have you done any research into the cost of advertising the service ?  I would be fascinated  to watch a new recruit coming straight from a locksmith course and having to open a 3 star rated anit - drill , anti- snap , anti-pick , anti- bump Cylinder  !   Could be very embarrassing and a very costly mistake .  I’ve seen many new recruits into the trade over the last couple of decades and very, very few survive the first 9 months . I’m not saying it’s impossible  , but after start up costs and entering an already saturated market , the likelihood is that you will lose money .


----------



## marksman (Jul 21, 2020)

This was a reply to a post by Jamesbrown . about a locksmith course . Sorry missed the reply feature .


----------



## chellie (Jul 21, 2020)

DanFST said:



			Most creditors were offering payment holidays for this exact situation, I know we still are.

I'm going to assume he didn't call up and ask?
		
Click to expand...

Isn't there hep with council tax as well or is that paid for him?

Oh, and Tesco need staff and Lidl.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 21, 2020)

DanFST said:



			Most creditors were offering payment holidays for this exact situation, I know we still are.

I'm going to assume he didn't call up and ask?
		
Click to expand...

He still has debt accumulated to be paid off.  And yes - he knows how to manage debt...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 21, 2020)

GB72 said:



			Was the debt declared as part of the application for universal credit. If so, it may have been taken into account as part of the initial calculation.
		
Click to expand...

No - because when he registered for UC he did not have the debt.  The debt built up as he waited to be paid what he was owed on the assumption that he'd get paid and then be able to clear the debt.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 21, 2020)

chellie said:



			Isn't there hep with council tax as well or is that paid for him?

Oh, and Tesco need staff and Lidl.
		
Click to expand...

Council Tax is dealt with separately from UC as it is nothing to do with the DWP.  The council give a large reduction - but not all is waived - you have to pay the balance out of your UC.

Tesco and Lidl - yes - OK.  But available work is not really the point of my UC question.


----------



## GB72 (Jul 21, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			No - because when he registered for UC he did not have the debt.  The debt built up as he waited to be paid what he was owed on the assumption that he'd get paid and then be able to clear the debt.
		
Click to expand...

Apologies, meant the debt owed to your son rather than any debt that he subsequently accrued. 

The comments are very relevant to a universal credit question. Your son gets a job with Tesco or whoever, he no longer needs universal credit and the money he is owed can be paid to him without losing out. Situation solved.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 21, 2020)

GB72 said:



			Apologies, meant the debt owed to your son rather than any debt that he subsequently accrued.

The comments are very relevant to a universal credit question. Your son gets a job with Tesco or whoever, he no longer needs universal credit and the money he is owed can be paid to him without losing out. Situation solved.
		
Click to expand...

Correct - if he can delay getting paid until he gets a job and can come off UC.  The debt still builds until then.


----------



## Wolf (Jul 21, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Council Tax is dealt with separately from UC as it is nothing to do with the DWP.  The council give a large reduction - but not all is waived - you have to pay the balance out of your UC.

Tesco and Lidl - yes - OK.  But available work is not really the point of my UC question.
		
Click to expand...

Might wanna check your facts on that as UC does include allowance for both rent and council tax as well a priority bills. Whilst you still have to advise local council of receipt of benefit for reduction, UC can and will if requested pay your proportion of council tax and rent directly to council or landlords. Yes it comes out of the overall benefit but that is the whole premise of it being called Universal Credit it encompasses the benefit spectrum universally. Of course they don't waive all of the amount because there is still responsibility to pay these bills for anyone including those on benefit.

Your point about his debt incurred whilst waiting, seems to suggest perhaps naivety on your sons part especially as you state he knows how to manage debt. I totally get it not being ideal debt built up because UC is a ridiculously slow process, but your son could have contacted his debtors and advised of being on UC and time required to pay thus lessening the debt incurred and give him breathing space. All companies have an obligation to ensure priority bills are met first and seek amicable payment plans that don't leave him going without, this includes putting holds on debts and interest.

Lastly the part about jobs is hugely pertinent because it would have meant gaining an income that is greater than that of his UC payments, thus removing any need for UC, any upset about missing out in his money owed to him and would have been less overall stress for him and you.

You seem to think some of us on here are against him or you, similar to that of how you perceive government is unfair on him and not helping its far from it, some of us have had to suffer being on UC, being out of work and finding ways to make ends meet, we just accept that includes finding other jobs in different areas we wouldn't normally consider. Overall UC is a safety net to help the basics thats all it is meant to be, its not meant to totally replace an income just do enough to help him back on his feet and that ultimately has to come from him. I think you come across as a kind and caring parent which is IMO brilliant but the system is not at fault for his overall financial situation and not being paid on time by the company he worked for. Plus you can't seem to see the difference between savings and income. He didn't have the 1k in savings, he is getting it as income and that must rightfully be taken into account.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 21, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			No - because when he registered for UC he did not have the debt.  The debt built up as he waited to be paid what he was owed on the assumption that he'd get paid and then be able to clear the debt.
		
Click to expand...

So he hadn't done the work at the point he first claimed UC ?

If he had done the work and that led to the invoice before claiming UC the debt was owed, however it may not have been overdue at that point but would need to have been declared


----------



## Jamesbrown (Jul 21, 2020)

marksman said:



			Sounds easy doesn’t it ? Have you done any research into the cost of advertising the service ?  I would be fascinated  to watch a new recruit coming straight from a locksmith course and having to open a 3 star rated anit - drill , anti- snap , anti-pick , anti- bump Cylinder  !   Could be very embarrassing and a very costly mistake .  I’ve seen many new recruits into the trade over the last couple of decades and very, very few survive the first 9 months . I’m not saying it’s impossible  , but after start up costs and entering an already saturated market , the likelihood is that you will lose money .
		
Click to expand...

You can appear on google for free whenever someone searches for locksmiths in their area. Gone are the days of yellow pages.
I was offering an avenue of training which seemed reasonably priced for the initial basics to do basic jobs and with training he could get help to set up and take further training. Auto, safes try to get police and court order work one confident. 
Anything’s better than claiming benefits really. 

His father seems to want to help him and could be a good career if he chooses the right paths, help with money and the lad gets his head down and makes it work.


----------



## DanFST (Jul 21, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			He still has debt accumulated to be paid off.  And yes - he knows how to manage debt...
		
Click to expand...




SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Now he has the debt to service.
		
Click to expand...

Which one is it?

You've already said he's paying council tax, when he doesn't need to. So I would hazard a guess he hasn't spoken to them or credit institutions, damaging himself further.


----------



## DanFST (Jul 21, 2020)

chellie said:



			Isn't there hep with council tax as well or is that paid for him?

Oh, and Tesco need staff and Lidl.
		
Click to expand...


Yep, at least my council are offering interest free payment holidays.

Edit: You're right, you can even get support to only owe 10% a month.


----------



## drdel (Jul 21, 2020)

A bit more than a year ago when the subject of your son's financial woes were raised I suggested that the "first loss is the best loss". As his father IMO you really need to get him and his girl friend to be working, anything is better than nowt.

Of course help with cash flow but you really need to stress this as a short term , stop gap measure until paid work is found by them. Many of us have experienced dramatic income losses and resorted to pretty horrible manual jobs  (most of which are now mechanised) in order to pay the bills without the safety net of 'comfortable parents '.

The time for dreaming of a fanciful entertainment based future career is I'm gone under the bus as many theatre staff are finding.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 21, 2020)

Am I missing a point here (and if so apologies in advance) but if I was owed £1,000 then I wouldn't be leaving it alone and would be hassling through any avenue possible as it is payment for services rendered and so salary. I don't understand why he hasn't pursued this further. Secondly, regardless of whether it's "relevant to the UC and the debate" I'd be finding paid work of any type even if that's stacking shelves, and get cash coming in. At least that way there is a potential, even if UC is reduced to get a few quid set aside. 

I just don't see, especially when firms were still running payroll payments for their furloughed staff there wasn't a way to get the money owed. It sounds to me (and I may be sounding overly harsh) that there was a little bit of head burying and the "money will turn up" and "we'll be ok" and not dealing with the here and now. As I say if I've missed the point especially regarding chasing the payment then sorry but why let that amount linger


----------



## Stuart_C (Jul 22, 2020)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Am I missing a point here (and if so apologies in advance) but if I was owed £1,000 then I wouldn't be leaving it alone and would be hassling through any avenue possible as it is payment for services rendered and so salary. I don't understand why he hasn't pursued this further. Secondly, regardless of whether it's "relevant to the UC and the debate" I'd be finding paid work of any type even if that's stacking shelves, and get cash coming in. At least that way there is a potential, even if UC is reduced to get a few quid set aside.

*I just don't see, especially when firms were still running payroll payments for their furloughed staff there wasn't a way to get the money owed. It sounds to me (and I may be sounding overly harsh) that there was a little bit of head burying and the "money will turn up" and "we'll be ok" and not dealing with the here and now. As I say if I've missed the point especially regarding chasing the payment then sorry but why let that amount linger*

Click to expand...

You've obviously never experienced chasing money off customers have you?? The construction trade is rife for it, I'm sure the arts and entertainment trade is too. 

It's not as easy as you make it sound Homer, people like yourself who are paid every month whether you turn up or not  never will understand or see it.

I was recently owed £4.8k  by a contractor, I chased and chased it but kept getting either no response or little response.  I finally got "The person who authorises payments/makes payments has been furloughed  so no contractor is being paid" . I got paid 3 weeks ago but it was a worrying time for me on top of the Covid issues. 

It also has a knock on affect when you're desperate for the payment and you're not getting anywhere it takes over your daily life and puts you in a poor frame of mind.
So to suggest he buried his head in the sand etc is a tad disingenuous.


----------



## GB72 (Jul 22, 2020)

Stuart_C said:



			You've obviously never experienced chasing money off customers have you?? The construction trade is rife for it, I'm sure the arts and entertainment trade is too.

It's not as easy as you make it sound Homer, people like yourself who are paid every month whether you turn up or not  never will understand or see it.

I was recently owed £4.8k  by a contractor, I chased and chased it but kept getting either no response or little response.  I finally got "The person who authorises payments/makes payments has been furloughed  so no contractor is being paid" . I got paid 3 weeks ago but it was a worrying time for me on top of the Covid issues.

It also has a knock on affect when you're desperate for the payment and you're not getting anywhere it takes over your daily life and puts you in a poor frame of mind.
So to suggest he buried his head in the sand etc is a tad disingenuous.
		
Click to expand...

Agree with that, my wife is a health and safety contractor who did a couple of weeks work just in to lockdown re-writing a firm's policies and procedures. Took weeks to get paid despite 30 day terms and that was the difference between her being able to pay herself last month or not. It is stressful stuff. 

Thing is, some companies are bad payers but good for work. As such, you cannot go in 'all guns blazing' to recover money owed as you may well never see another job off them again and they may be providing a large chunk of you annual workload (sounds like the company in this case may have been the sole source of work). Then there is the assumption that suing for the debt is easy. It is not. It takes time, costs money that you may not have at the time and you can only claim the most basic of out of pocket expenses for the process, you cannot just hand it to a solicitor as you are not expected to have legal representation in small claims matters. 

Certainly think that the belied that he was burying his head in the sand may be a bit OTT.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 22, 2020)

GB72 said:



			Agree with that, my wife is a health and safety contractor who did a couple of weeks work just in to lockdown re-writing a firm's policies and procedures. Took weeks to get paid despite 30 day terms and that was the difference between her being able to pay herself last month or not. It is stressful stuff.

*Thing is, some companies are bad payers but good for work. As such, you cannot go in 'all guns blazing' to recover money owed as you may well never see another job off them again and they may be providing a large chunk of you annual workload (sounds like the company in this case may have been the sole source of work). *Then there is the assumption that suing for the debt is easy. It is not. It takes time, costs money that you may not have at the time and you can only claim the most basic of out of pocket expenses for the process, you cannot just hand it to a solicitor as you are not expected to have legal representation in small claims matters.

Certainly think that the belied that he was burying his head in the sand may be a bit OTT.
		
Click to expand...

This is very much the case in the sector my lad works in.  He gets his self-employed work off a couple of the main players in the scene - and he has to be very careful to not p' them off through pressing and hassling them for payment - and legal threats to recover monies owed might get him what he is owed, but he kisses goodbye to any future work from them.  And as the businesses in the sector in the UK are not that many and form a network, I suspect that word would get around and that would be that.    No matter how valid his case is - he has to be sensitive with his relationship with them as he has no 'right' to any work from them.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 22, 2020)

chrisd said:



			So he hadn't done the work at the point he first claimed UC ?

If he had done the work and that led to the invoice before claiming UC the debt was owed, however it may not have been overdue at that point but would need to have been declared
		
Click to expand...

He did the work in Jan and Feb and registered for UC in March after he had invoiced for the work.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 22, 2020)

Wolf said:



			Might wanna check your facts on that as UC does include allowance for both rent and council tax as well a priority bills. Whilst you still have to advise local council of receipt of benefit for reduction, UC can and will if requested pay your proportion of council tax and rent directly to council or landlords. Yes it comes out of the overall benefit but that is the whole premise of it being called Universal Credit it encompasses the benefit spectrum universally. Of course they don't waive all of the amount because there is still responsibility to pay these bills for anyone including those on benefit.

Your point about his debt incurred whilst waiting, seems to suggest perhaps naivety on your sons part especially as you state he knows how to manage debt. I totally get it not being ideal debt built up because UC is a ridiculously slow process, but your son could have contacted his debtors and advised of being on UC and time required to pay thus lessening the debt incurred and give him breathing space. All companies have an obligation to ensure priority bills are met first and seek amicable payment plans that don't leave him going without, this includes putting holds on debts and interest.

Lastly the part about jobs is hugely pertinent because it would have meant gaining an income that is greater than that of his UC payments, thus removing any need for UC, any upset about missing out in his money owed to him and would have been less overall stress for him and you.

You seem to think some of us on here are against him or you, similar to that of how you perceive government is unfair on him and not helping its far from it, some of us have had to suffer being on UC, being out of work and finding ways to make ends meet, we just accept that includes finding other jobs in different areas we wouldn't normally consider. Overall UC is a safety net to help the basics thats all it is meant to be, its not meant to totally replace an income just do enough to help him back on his feet and that ultimately has to come from him. I think you come across as a kind and caring parent which is IMO brilliant but the system is not at fault for his overall financial situation and not being paid on time by the company he worked for. Plus you can't seem to see the difference between savings and income. He didn't have the 1k in savings, he is getting it as income and that must rightfully be taken into account.
		
Click to expand...

I am not raising any issue in respect of UC in principle.  I am suggesting that in the circumstances of the pandemic and the lockdown that there could have been some relaxation of some of the rules in respect of an individuals income after registering for UC (as a result of the impact on their work of the lockdown) that came about as a result of work done *before *the lockdown.  That is the only point I am making.  Nothing else.

And I am fully aware of what UC covers and what it doesn't in respect of such as Council Tax and Rent - and sadly also of the whole debt management side of life.


----------



## drdel (Jul 22, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			This is very much the case in the sector my lad works in.  He gets his self-employed work off a couple of the main players in the scene - and he has to be very careful to not p' them off through pressing and hassling them for payment - and legal threats to recover monies owed might get him what he is owed, but *he kisses goodbye to any future work from them.*  And as the businesses in the sector in the UK are not that many and form a network, I suspect that word would get around and that would be that.    No matter how valid his case is - he has to be sensitive with his relationship with them as he has no 'right' to any work from them.
		
Click to expand...

But the 'entertainment/performing arts' sector is in serious bother and large numbers of people will be willing to work for very little. The industry is well known for taking advantage of young people's desire with many supported by wealthy, connected parents' and often nepotism over-rides merit in appointments. A shortage of jobs in the sector will be around for some time (>1 year) so would it not be best to get a cashflow from any work? Surely one of them could find something.

'Being nice' does not pay bills; I fear you are 'pushing water uphill'


----------



## chrisd (Jul 22, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			He did the work in Jan and Feb and registered for UC in March after he had invoiced for the work.
		
Click to expand...

So, the money was due (like wages or redundancy) and the UC would take that into account when working out any benefit payments and rightly so.


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 22, 2020)

chrisd said:



			So, the money was due (like wages or redundancy) and the UC would take that into account when working out any benefit payments and rightly so.
		
Click to expand...

Except - from what I understand.... Had it been paid before applying/going onto UC, it would not have been 'taken into account when working out any benefit payments'!


----------



## chrisd (Jul 22, 2020)

Foxholer said:



			Except - from what I understand.... Had it been paid before applying/going onto UC, it would not have been 'taken into account when working out any benefit payments'!
		
Click to expand...

Maybe so, but rules are rules and some benefit situations and some dont  - I suspect most of us have had these sort of irritations over the years!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 22, 2020)

I tend to equate UC with the Poll Tax.
Both very good simple ideas
Both brought in by the Tory Party
Both incredibly badly miss-managed by the Tory party.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 23, 2020)

Foxholer said:



			Except - from what I understand.... Had it been paid before applying/going onto UC, it would not have been 'taken into account when working out any benefit payments'!
		
Click to expand...

Correct - and the lockdown - for whatever reason - stopped both employer and contracting companies making payments he was due.


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 23, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Correct - and the lockdown - for whatever reason - stopped both employer and contracting companies making payments he was due. 

If the payment had come in *before *he registered for UC it would have counted as savings and would not have impacted his UC amount.  All I am saying is that if it is OK to have £6k in savings when you register for UC, then under the unprecedented circumstances the rule could be waived for income due from work done before registering but not received, and so not counted in the UC calc. That's all.

As it happens my lad is aiming to get a job and come off UC before he gets paid what he is owed as self-employed.  It is more likely that that pay due from his employment will hit before he comes off UC and that will reduce his UC.
		
Click to expand...

I *do* consider that 'unfair'! UC should deem payments made but not collected - for all reasons I can think of - as 'savings' for calculating any amount due!


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 23, 2020)

Has he mentioned in his journal his circumstances and explained his debt issues and ask to speak with an advisor.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 23, 2020)

Old Skier said:



			Has he mentioned in his journal his circumstances and explained his debt issues and ask to speak with an advisor.
		
Click to expand...

He tries to speak with his advisor very regularly and yes - his journal is his record.  I don't actually know whether he's mentioned the debt he built up after registering and before his first payment 5 weeks later - that debt he expected to be able to clear immediately the pay he'd earned came in.

The fact that someone with a bit of money saved can find themself getting a higher UC than someone with nothing and depending on an income at end of a month to survive does not seem right.  If UC is aimed at supporting you when out of work and income works against you - then perhaps so should any savings - after all you can draw on savings as income.  And many on UC with savings will do just that as their savings are often there for a rainy day.


----------



## Neilds (Jul 23, 2020)

Foxholer said:



			Except - from what I understand.... Had it been paid before applying/going onto UC, it would not have been 'taken into account when working out any benefit payments'!
		
Click to expand...

This is not correct. My wife works in benefits so can speak with some knowledge. If it is paid for a job, it is income not savings. If this was paid in the month prior to applying for UC then it would have been taken into consideration and would have reduced his UC payments accordingly. The fact he has been paid late has just delayed the deduction so now he feels aggrieved


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 23, 2020)

Neilds said:



			This is not correct. My wife works in benefits so can speak with some knowledge. If it is paid for a job, it is income not savings. If this was paid in the month prior to applying for UC then it would have been taken into consideration and would have reduced his UC payments accordingly. The fact he has been paid late has just delayed the deduction so now he feels aggrieved
		
Click to expand...

Is the '(*one*) month prior to applying' important? Meaning had it been paid (for work) 2 months prior to UC, it would have been considered 'savings' (or at least not considered 'income'. That actually seems a reasonable 'stand-down' period. However, if it was paid late - for work carried out several months previously - as I believe is the case here - claimant has already had to, in effect, use previous income/savings to get by, so it shouldn't affect the UC payment!

Put another way....If the payment had not been delayed, there'd be no adjustment of UC. Does seem equitable/fair to me!


----------



## Neilds (Jul 23, 2020)

Foxholer said:



			Is the '(*one*) month prior to applying' important? Meaning had it been paid (for work) 2 months prior to UC, it would have been considered 'savings' (or at least not considered 'income'. That actually seems a reasonable 'stand-down' period. However, if it was paid late - for work carried out several months previously - as I believe is the case here - claimant has already had to, in effect, use previous income/savings to get by, so it shouldn't affect the UC payment!

Put another way....If the payment had not been delayed, there'd be no adjustment of UC. Does seem equitable/fair to me!
		
Click to expand...

The month before is important, as that is what someone is expected to live off for the next month so (usually) little or no benefit will be paid for the first month. 
Also, just to show how unfair the system is, my wife has seen claims from households who were previously on £10,000 per month who claimed they had no savings


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 23, 2020)

Neilds said:



			The month before is important, as that is what someone is expected to live off for the next month so (usually) little or no benefit will be paid for the first month.
...
		
Click to expand...

I figured that! The difference in SILH Jr's case is that the payment wasn't FOR that previous month (or even for the one before would be reasonable). It was a (much delayed) payment IN the previous month for work carried out several months previous. My assertion (of fairness) is that where it is a _delayed_ payment - for work carried out more than 2 months previously (assuming payment for month 1 is made in month 2), it should NOT be treated as 'current' earnings which would reduce UC payment!


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 23, 2020)

Foxholer said:



			I figured that! The difference in SILH Jr's case is that the payment wasn't FOR that previous month (or even for the one before would be reasonable). It was a (much delayed) payment IN the previous month for work carried out several months previous. My assertion (of fairness) is that where it is a _delayed_ payment - for work carried out more than 2 months previously (assuming payment for month 1 is made in month 2), it should NOT be treated as 'current' earnings which would reduce UC payment!
		
Click to expand...

My understandings is that if he had updated his claim with his debt it could have been taken into account against his income.


----------



## SaintHacker (Jul 23, 2020)

9 pages and still going, for the fourth time.
I'll  tell you what i find unfair. I find it unfair that i pay income tax and some of that tax goes to give people who can work but refuse to money to live on. 
Ive absolutely no problem supporting those who cannot work for whatever reason but why should those of us who work and contribute give our hard earned income to those who 'won't get out of bed for minimum wage', or think working in McDonalds is beneath them. Thats what i find unfair.


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Jul 23, 2020)

SaintHacker said:



			9 pages and still going, for the fourth time.
I'll  tell you what i find unfair. I find it unfair that i pay income tax and some of that tax goes to give people who can work but refuse to money to live on.
Ive absolutely no problem supporting those who cannot work for whatever reason but why should those of us who work and contribute give our hard earned income to those who 'won't get out of bed for minimum wage', or think working in McDonalds is beneath them. Thats what i find unfair.
		
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the benefit system which should be to support you when in need has become the income to replace having to work. A generation of unemployed and benefits life is very hard to break down...and afford.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jul 23, 2020)

Traminator said:



			I alway thought benefits are there to help people who can't find work, not able-bodied young people who choose not to work.

I think in general, everyone has been very polite and reserved with their comments on this... 🤔
		
Click to expand...

Probably because the skiving, oxygen thieves are a very, very, tiny minority compared to the genuine claimants.
Sadly that minority get the publicity and the majority are tar’d with the same brush.


----------



## Neilds (Jul 24, 2020)

pauldj42 said:



			Probably because the skiving, oxygen thieves are a very, very, tiny minority compared to the genuine claimants.
Sadly that minority get the publicity and the majority are tar’d with the same brush.
		
Click to expand...

The system is being abused so much it would scare you. Partly because of cuts to fraud investigators and partly because of claims being rushed through due to bad publicity fraud is very common. My wife regularly sees claims where both parents (separated) are claiming they look after the children and recently had a couple of claims where the landlords address was a street just round the corner from us. This street is not the type of place for people to have a 2nd property so a quick check showed the owner was different to the claim form so a fraud investigation was started. However, the fraud team for the County is 1 person!
You would also be surprised how many 18 year olds , when they no longer count on the claim and are expected to contribute to running the household, have arguments with their parents and move out - and the parent has no idea where they have moved to. The same excuses come out time and again


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jul 24, 2020)

Neilds said:



			The system is being abused so much it would scare you. Partly because of cuts to fraud investigators and partly because of claims being rushed through due to bad publicity fraud is very common. My wife regularly sees claims where both parents (separated) are claiming they look after the children and recently had a couple of claims where the landlords address was a street just round the corner from us. This street is not the type of place for people to have a 2nd property so a quick check showed the owner was different to the claim form so a fraud investigation was started. However, the fraud team for the County is 1 person!
You would also be surprised how many 18 year olds , when they no longer count on the claim and are expected to contribute to running the household, have arguments with their parents and move out - and the parent has no idea where they have moved to. The same excuses come out time and again
		
Click to expand...

Not for one minute saying benefit fraud doesn’t go on, but no were near the scale people believe, the last “official” Government figures showed out of a total of £172Bn spent on benefits around £2Bn was lost to fraud and £1.4Bn was underpaid, a loss of around £600 mil to the treasury.
Still a disgusting amount and all those caught should be jailed, imo.

But let’s not pretend it’s only a minority on benefits committing fraud, there are some self-employed who “fiddle” expenses or the rich who fiddle their tax, both of which cost the tax payer a lot more. Tax evasion costs us on average £6Bn a year and tax avoidance (exploiting the loopholes) costs us £1.7Bn.

Maybe the resources to tackle all fraud need strengthening across the board and redirecting in some cases.


----------



## Neilds (Jul 24, 2020)

pauldj42 said:



			Not for one minute saying benefit fraud doesn’t go on, but no were near the scale people believe, the last “official” Government figures showed out of a total of £172Bn spent on benefits around £2Bn was lost to fraud and £1.4Bn was underpaid, a loss of around £600 mil to the treasury.
Still a disgusting amount and all those caught should be jailed, imo.

But let’s not pretend it’s only a minority on benefits committing fraud, there are some self-employed who “fiddle” expenses or the rich who fiddle their tax, both of which cost the tax payer a lot more. Tax evasion costs us on average £6Bn a year and tax avoidance (exploiting the loopholes) costs us £1.7Bn.

Maybe the resources to tackle all fraud need strengthening across the board and redirecting in some cases.
		
Click to expand...

The ‘funny’ thing about self employed when all this CV-19 kicked off was the amount of people contacting benefits to ask what the government were going to do about their lost earnings. They got a bit flustered when questioned about what earnings they were referring to as they had  said they had little/no earnings so they could get a higher rate of benefits. Some people want it all ways!


----------



## SaintHacker (Jul 24, 2020)

Yep. I know of quite a few local cab drivers who have been very upset to find out they were due next to no support as their previous tax returns have showed little to no profit for the year. No sympathy I'm afraid, never a truer saying than you reap what you sow...


----------



## Hobbit (Jul 24, 2020)

SaintHacker said:



			9 pages and still going, for the fourth time.
I'll  tell you what i find unfair. I find it unfair that i pay income tax and some of that tax goes to give people who can work but refuse to money to live on.
Ive absolutely no problem supporting those who cannot work for whatever reason but why should those of us who work and contribute give our hard earned income to those who 'won't get out of bed for minimum wage', or think working in McDonalds is beneath them. Thats what i find unfair.
		
Click to expand...

I'd add those that choose a particular, low paid, career because it is their passion but then expect tax credits to supplement the low pay. Er, excuse me, you chose the low paid career, get off your ar5e and get a second job to supplement it. And I wonder who funds the tax credits? Those that pay tax fund it.


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 24, 2020)

Hobbit said:



			I'd add those that choose a particular, low paid, career because it is their passion but then expect tax credits to supplement the low pay. Er, excuse me, you chose the low paid career, get off your ar5e and get a second job to supplement it. And I wonder who funds the tax credits? Those that pay tax fund it.
		
Click to expand...

Never been a fan of working tax credits. Encourages buisness to pay rubbish wages because the gov will top it up


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 24, 2020)

Traminator said:



			I alway thought benefits are there to help people who can't find work, not able-bodied young people who choose not to work.

I think in general, everyone has been very polite and reserved with their comments on this... 🤔
		
Click to expand...

which is as it should be...given the many hundreds of thousands of workers who have had to register for UC in the last few months - 100% encouraged by the government - and who would not take kindly to being lumped in with those few who choose to be on, a stay on, UC.


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 24, 2020)

pauldj42 said:



			...Tax evasion costs us on average £6Bn a year and tax avoidance (exploiting the loopholes) costs us £1.7Bn.
		
Click to expand...

It's important to remember that while 'tax evasion' is illegal, tax avoidance is perfectly legal - and is, imo, obligatory! In fact, many/most of the (so-called) loopholes were quite deliberately created by the Government as a way of funding specifically targeted areas of the economy without directly funding them - the UK film industry being typical!


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 24, 2020)

Neilds said:



			However, the fraud team for the County is 1 person!
		
Click to expand...

Probably because the majority of the fraud teams have been hived off to deal with the current influx of claimants.


----------



## chellie (Jul 24, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			which is as it should be...given the many hundreds of thousands of workers who have had to register for UC in the last few months - 100% encouraged by the government - and who would not take kindly to being lumped in with those few who choose to be on, a stay on, UC.
		
Click to expand...

But there are so many who have chosen not to seek alternative work including your son.

No doubt you will see this as having a go at yourself but I have been actively seeking a new job since January. I have been unable to get any help from the government at all. It has been soul destroying to not even get an interview but then I find out that up to 200 people have applied for the same job that I was going for. I have also been hit by COVID as ones that I had got through to interview stage suspended all recruitment or changed their mind about taking on another staff member. I did however choose not to apply for Tesco as I didn't want unsociable as I am not a youngster.


----------



## Neilds (Jul 24, 2020)

Old Skier said:



			Probably because the majority of the fraud teams have been hived off to deal with the current influx of claimants.[/QUOTE
Teams were cut well before this as part of cost savings. Unfortunately this leads to less fraud being detected and therefore higher costs!
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 24, 2020)

Strange, in Devon its increased as the local authority teams moved across. I personally know 5 just in the north of the county where I am


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jul 24, 2020)

Foxholer said:



			It's important to remember that while 'tax evasion' is illegal, tax avoidance is perfectly legal - and is, imo, obligatory! In fact, many/most of the (so-called) loopholes were quite deliberately created by the Government as a way of funding specifically targeted areas of the economy without directly funding them - the UK film industry being typical!
		
Click to expand...

And there are those who exploit/avoid the tax for sheer greed and is immoral imo.

"Tax avoidance is bending the rules of the tax system to gain a tax advantage that Parliament never intended," said a spokesman for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC).

"It often involves contrived, artificial transactions that serve little or no purpose other than to produce a tax advantage. It involves operating within the letter - but not the spirit - of the law," he said.

Tax avoidance currently costs the taxpayer £4bn a year, according to the latest figures from HMRC.

That is very nearly as much as illegal tax evasion, which costs £5.1bn.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 24, 2020)

pauldj42 said:



			And there are those who exploit/avoid the tax for sheer greed and is immoral imo.

"Tax avoidance is bending the rules of the tax system to gain a tax advantage that Parliament never intended," said a spokesman for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC).

"It often involves contrived, artificial transactions that serve little or no purpose other than to produce a tax advantage. It involves operating within the letter - but not the spirit - of the law," he said.

Tax avoidance currently costs the taxpayer £4bn a year, according to the latest figures from HMRC.

That is very nearly as much as illegal tax evasion, which costs £5.1bn.
		
Click to expand...

I don't see it as you do Paul. Over the years running my own business I avoided paying tax by taking a low wage but reasonable dividend payments to supplement my income. I know there are more contrived ways to avoid tax but the benefit was, in my case, that money stayed in the business and helped it grow.  Corporation tax is a necessity I guess, but in a growing business such as I had it meant growth was slower as I had to sent a large % of money to the Inland Revenue annually for all manor of taxes which would have, over the years allowed me to employ more people and grow the business. By the time I retired Corporation tax had been lowered as was retirement relief 🤗


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jul 24, 2020)

chrisd said:



			I don't see it as you do Paul. Over the years running my own business I avoided paying tax by taking a low wage but reasonable dividend payments to supplement my income. I know there are more contrived ways to avoid tax but the benefit was, in my case, that money stayed in the business and helped it grow.  Corporation tax is a necessity I guess, but in a growing business such as I had it meant growth was slower as I had to sent a large % of money to the Inland Revenue annually for all manor of taxes which would have, over the years allowed me to employ more people and grow the business. By the time I retired Corporation tax had been lowered as was retirement relief 🤗
		
Click to expand...

And I’ve no issue with tax avoidance being used for the right reasons, it’s when it’s not.

Look at all the Celebrities a few years back, ie Take That, Jimmy Carr etc, what they did wasn’t illegal, none of them were charged, but they were hit with paying it back, because the judge disagreed at the tax tribunals (which they asked for) with the information they had supplied.

Those are the sort I’m on about not those using the Government avoidance scheme:
schemes that have been allocated a Scheme Reference Number (SRN) by HMRC under the Disclosure of Tax Avoidance Schemes (DOTAS) regime.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 24, 2020)

chellie said:



			But there are so many who have chosen not to seek alternative work including your son.

No doubt you will see this as having a go at yourself but I have been actively seeking a new job since January. I have been unable to get any help from the government at all. It has been soul destroying to not even get an interview but then I find out that up to 200 people have applied for the same job that I was going for. I have also been hit by COVID as ones that I had got through to interview stage suspended all recruitment or changed their mind about taking on another staff member. I did however choose not to apply for Tesco as I didn't want unsociable as I am not a youngster.
		
Click to expand...

My son is sorting his head out given the career that he has worked on for the last six years is now in tatters.  Meanwhile he is still getting a little furlough payment from his nightclub employment (from which he will be made redundant in mid-August) and so receives a reduced UC (as you'd expect); he has registered with a number of agencies for admin-type work but is taking a short breather as he has had taken no holiday for nearly two years - working flat out and every weekend to build the career that has now collapsed.   He hopes to get a job next month as he wants to be off UC early September.  There may be some milking the system.  There are...and many of them have plenty money in savings and we might say shouldn't qualify for a penny of UC - but they do.


----------



## 3offTheTee (Jul 24, 2020)

SILH

What work has your son applied for during the last 4 months?
What work has his partner applied for during the last 4 months?


----------



## Stuart_C (Jul 24, 2020)

pauldj42 said:



			And I’ve no issue with tax avoidance being used for the right reasons, it’s when it’s not.

Look at all the Celebrities a few years back, ie Take That, Jimmy Carr etc, what they did wasn’t illegal, none of them were charged, but they were hit with paying it back, because the judge disagreed at the tax tribunals (which they asked for) with the information they had supplied.

Those are the sort I’m on about not those using the Government avoidance scheme:
schemes that have been allocated a Scheme Reference Number (SRN) by HMRC under the Disclosure of Tax Avoidance Schemes (DOTAS) regime.
		
Click to expand...

You cant be against a percentage of tax avoidance  can you?  Surely it's all or nothing.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jul 24, 2020)

Stuart_C said:



			You cant be against a percentage of tax avoidance  can you?  Surely it's all or nothing.
		
Click to expand...

No it’s not mate, it’s not illegal and done for the right reasons, ie the Government backed schemes or ChrisD’s example, I don’t have an issue with it.

The using of it to evade tax by unscrupulous people and business’s is were it needs clamping down.


----------



## Leftie (Jul 24, 2020)

pauldj42 said:



			No it’s not mate, it’s not illegal and done for the right reasons, ie the Government backed schemes or ChrisD’s example, I don’t have an issue with it.

The using of it to evade tax by unscrupulous people and business’s is were it needs clamping down.
		
Click to expand...

So who is going to define what is a right/wrong reason?  Who defines who is an unscrupulous person/business and who can/can't legally avoid tax?

It's like golf.  If the rules allow something to be done then it's not illegal.  It may be against the "spirit of the game"/immoral but allowed.  If I were in a position where I had a potential inheritance tax liability, then I would consider using any of the multitude of vehicles available to mitigate it.   

Recently the Duke of Westminster (possibly) the richest man in England died and allegedly no inheritance tax was paid on his estate.  Exceptionally good tax (avoidance) planning.  Was he one of your " unscrupulous people".

Don't get me wrong, I agree that there are loads of examples where companies should pay more tax in this country (Starbucks, Amazon, etc) but all the while tax legislation can be manipulated to their advantage then they are doing nothing "wrong".


----------



## Hobbit (Jul 25, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			My son is sorting his head out given the career that he has worked on for the last six years is now in tatters.  Meanwhile he is still getting a little furlough payment from his nightclub employment (from which he will be made redundant in mid-August) and so receives a reduced UC (as you'd expect); he has registered with a number of agencies for admin-type work but is taking a short breather as he has had taken no holiday for nearly two years - working flat out and every weekend to build the career that has now collapsed.   He hopes to get a job next month as he wants to be off UC early September.  There may be some milking the system.  There are...and many of them have plenty money in savings and we might say shouldn't qualify for a penny of UC - but they do.
		
Click to expand...

”He’s taking a short breather as he had taken no holiday for nearly two years...”

He’s 4 months into a short breather, courtesy of lockdown. Yes it would appear some are milking the system....


----------



## chellie (Jul 25, 2020)

Hobbit said:



			”He’s taking a short breather as he had taken no holiday for nearly two years...”

*He’s 4 months into a short breather, courtesy of lockdown. Yes it would appear some are milking the system....*

Click to expand...

Tea spat over monitor moment


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jul 25, 2020)

Leftie said:



			So who is going to define what is a right/wrong reason?  Who defines who is an unscrupulous person/business and who can/can't legally avoid tax?

It's like golf.  If the rules allow something to be done then it's not illegal.  It may be against the "spirit of the game"/immoral but allowed.  If I were in a position where I had a potential inheritance tax liability, then I would consider using any of the multitude of vehicles available to mitigate it.  

Recently the Duke of Westminster (possibly) the richest man in England died and allegedly no inheritance tax was paid on his estate.  Exceptionally good tax (avoidance) planning.  Was he one of your " unscrupulous people".

Don't get me wrong, I agree that there are loads of examples where companies should pay more tax in this country (Starbucks, Amazon, etc) but all the while tax legislation can be manipulated to their advantage then they are doing nothing "wrong".
		
Click to expand...

It’s defined by the HMRC, like the examples of the celebrities I gave, some accepted it, some took it to the tax tribunal and lost, none of them were charged with any criminal offence, but still paid up.

As for the Duke of Westminster, absolute disgrace, and the type of loophole that should be closed, whether we like it or not it shouldn’t down to individual wealth and the “type” of accountant you can afford, nothing illegal, but morally it stinks.


----------



## Wolf (Jul 25, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			My son is sorting his head out given the career that he has worked on for the last six years is now in tatters.  Meanwhile he is still getting a little furlough payment from his nightclub employment (from which he will be made redundant in mid-August) and so receives a reduced UC (as you'd expect); he has registered with a number of agencies for admin-type work but is *taking a short breather as he has had taken no holiday for nearly two years* - working flat out and every weekend to build the career that has now collapsed.   *He hopes to get a job next month as he wants to be off UC early September.  There may be some milking the system*.  There are...and many of them have plenty money in savings and we might say shouldn't qualify for a penny of UC - but they do.
		
Click to expand...

I've read this post about 5 times to try and understand your POV but I'm sorry it makes no sense because its simply not consistent with your numerous posts about your son over the last 2 year period.  Quite a number of times over that period you  posted your son had no work & you were  bailing him out continuously. 

It was only this year you posted he had a good upturn in work and got a regular income. So your own posts suggest over the last 2 years he has had plenty of time off. 

As for he is taking a short breather and wants to be in work by September, that will a 6 month breather in which time you have continually bemoaned the government for not helping him & that he has mounting debts he needs help with. In that time he could have been helping himself by applying for various jobs and making his own financial situation better instead of relying on the bank of mum and dad to pay them. 

None of this is personal because my MiL is in exactly the same boat, we often have to hear from her how she is only getting x amount of pounds through UC but in the last 6 months hasn't bothered to apply for a single job because she believes the job centre should do it for her and its government fault she hasn't got a job yet depsite the fact she hasn't got off her arse and done anything about it, but comes cap in hand to us for help with money which we don't give.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 25, 2020)

Wolf said:



			I've read this post about 5 times to try and understand your POV but I'm sorry it makes no sense because its simply not consistent with your numerous posts about your son over the last 2 year period.  Quite a number of times over that period you  posted your son had no work & you were  bailing him out continuously.

It was only this year you posted he had a good upturn in work and got a regular income. So your own posts suggest over the last 2 years he has had plenty of time off.

As for he is taking a short breather and wants to be in work by September, that will a 6 month breather in which time you have continually bemoaned the government for not helping him & that he has mounting debts he needs help with. In that time he could have been helping himself by applying for various jobs and making his own financial situation better instead of relying on the bank of mum and dad to pay them.

None of this is personal because my MiL is in exactly the same boat, we often have to hear from her how she is only getting x amount of pounds through UC but in the last 6 months hasn't bothered to apply for a single job because she believes the job centre should do it for her and its government fault she hasn't got a job yet depsite the fact she hasn't got off her arse and done anything about it, but comes cap in hand to us for help with money which we don't give.
		
Click to expand...

I believe the whole thread has been a massive Whaa @Wolf , nothing consistent in any of his posts.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 25, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			My son is sorting his head out given the career that he has worked on for the last six years is now in tatters.  Meanwhile he is still getting a little furlough payment from his nightclub employment (from which he will be made redundant in mid-August) and so receives a reduced UC (as you'd expect); he has registered with a number of agencies for admin-type work but is taking a short breather as he has had taken no holiday for nearly two years - working flat out and every weekend to build the career that has now collapsed.   He hopes to get a job next month as he wants to be off UC early September.  There may be some milking the system.  There are...and many of them have plenty money in savings and we might say shouldn't qualify for a penny of UC - but they do.
		
Click to expand...

People are allowed a savings threshold in the UJ system which is not as generous as the threshold that many charities use when giving assistance.

The state system may have some flaws but in general it helps most people to live perhaps not in the way they want to, where would your son and the GF be without it. Perhaps in retrospect they should have taken one of the thousands of extra jobs created by the supermarkets.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 30, 2020)

Old Skier said:



			People are allowed a savings threshold in the UJ system which is not as generous as the threshold that many charities use when giving assistance.

The state system may have some flaws but in general it helps most people to live perhaps not in the way they want to, where would your son and the GF be without it. Perhaps in retrospect they should have taken one of the thousands of extra jobs created by the supermarkets.
		
Click to expand...

Always goes back to 'get a job in a supermarket - there are thousands of them'...and '...they should think themselves fortunate' - blah blah blah.  Except that's nothing to do with what I posted about.

Recall - it's OK to have up to £16,000 in savings to still qualify for UC - and up to £6,000 with it having no impact whatsoever.  Yet if you have NO savings and are on UC you can't have *any *delayed income - of *any *amount no matter how little - without it impacting your UC...that's just tough - that's OK...how it is.  That being the case shouldn't then those fortunate enough to have savings have to _use _these savings before expecting the state to help them out.  After all for a couple, £6000, is about 6months UC.  Plenty of time to get a job - in a supermarket perhaps - so they don't use up too much of their savings.  That's what I posted about.

You see - the system works better for those who have some money than it does for those have don't have any.


----------



## GreiginFife (Jul 30, 2020)

Maybe your son should have had some savings then. 
Being self employed was his choice after all, no one forced him in to it and with it comes the drawbacks like payments being made late or on terms past invoice. 

If he'd had a simple PAYE job then it's unlikely his pay would be late and none of this would matter.


----------



## GB72 (Jul 30, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Always goes back to 'get a job in a supermarket - there are thousands of them'...and '...they should think themselves fortunate' - blah blah blah.  Except that's nothing to do with what I posted about.

Recall - it's OK to have up to £16,000 in savings to still qualify for UC - and up to £6,000 with it having no impact whatsoever.  Yet if you have NO savings and are on UC you can't have *any *delayed income - of *any *amount no matter how little - without it impacting your UC...that's just tough - that's OK...how it is.  That being the case shouldn't then those fortunate enough to have savings have to _use _these savings before expecting the state to help them out.  After all for a couple, £6000, is about 6months UC.  Plenty of time to get a job - in a supermarket perhaps - so they don't use up too much of their savings.  That's what I posted about.

You see - the system works better for those who have some money than it does for those have don't have any.
		
Click to expand...

I have to disagree here, the system does not penalise those who have been prudent or frugal enough to tuck some money away. My wife is a self employed contractor. On day one she understood that, at the end of each contract there was no guarantee where the next one was coming from or how long it would take to get. As such, she would put some away every month, forgo a few things, cut back where she needed to, to ensure that she quickly had a month or 2 in 'salary' tucked away. She kept doing that throughout and has kept enough to keep her going for 4 months with no income until she found a full time job. What you are suggesting is that those that have done what it takes to save a bit for hard times should be penalised to benefit those that have spent what they have. 

The system, in the situation you describe, treats everyone the same. If you have income coming in, you do not get paid UC if you have savings or if you have not. What the system is doing is looking at the position at the start of the claim and not penalising you if you have put some money aside for emergencies, encouraging people to save if you like. Cannot see a problem there.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 30, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Always goes back to 'get a job in a supermarket - there are thousands of them'...and '...they should think themselves fortunate' - blah blah blah.  Except that's nothing to do with what I posted about.

Recall - it's OK to have up to £16,000 in savings to still qualify for UC - and up to £6,000 with it having no impact whatsoever.  Yet if you have NO savings and are on UC you can't have *any *delayed income - of *any *amount no matter how little - without it impacting your UC...that's just tough - that's OK...how it is.  That being the case shouldn't then those fortunate enough to have savings have to _use _these savings before expecting the state to help them out.  After all for a couple, £6000, is about 6months UC.  Plenty of time to get a job - in a supermarket perhaps - so they don't use up too much of their savings.  That's what I posted about.

You see - the system works better for those who have some money than it does for those have don't have any.
		
Click to expand...

All of your post suggest your son is only willing to work in one area which he appears to have had no ability to run it on a self employed business basis looking at your posts over the last couple of years. You have never mentioned what the girlfriends employment was so people can only assume her employment status was not very successful.

He, and possilly you, give the distinct impression that you cannot accept that it’s easier to become employed when your in employment even if it’s a job in a supermarket.


----------



## Hobbit (Jul 30, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Always goes back to 'get a job in a supermarket - there are thousands of them'...and '...they should think themselves fortunate' - blah blah blah.  Except that's nothing to do with what I posted about.

Recall - it's OK to have up to £16,000 in savings to still qualify for UC - and up to £6,000 with it having no impact whatsoever.  Yet if you have NO savings and are on UC you can't have *any *delayed income - of *any *amount no matter how little - without it impacting your UC...that's just tough - that's OK...how it is.  That being the case shouldn't then those fortunate enough to have savings have to _use _these savings before expecting the state to help them out.  After all for a couple, £6000, is about 6months UC.  Plenty of time to get a job - in a supermarket perhaps - so they don't use up too much of their savings.  That's what I posted about.

You see - the system works better for those who have some money than it does for those have don't have any.
		
Click to expand...

You know the difference between savings and an income, and it has been explained time and again, and again, and again. If it had been in your son's bank at the time he applied for UC it would have been a saving, as you well know. As he will be receiving it soon, or has recently received it, it is deemed an income. END OFF!

The linesman has said offside, its offside. How much of your life are you going to waste arguing its onside?


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 30, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			...
You see - the system works better for those who have *some* money than it does for those have don't have any.
		
Click to expand...

That's correct!

And some of the rules need, imo, some tweaking to be 'fairer'.

Everything else in this thread is just noise


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 30, 2020)

Surely the bottom line would be to get a job and some regular income coming in. Surely even working in a supermarket, cleaning job etc will pay more per week than UC and with a guaranteed salary coming in weekly/monthly it is far easier to budget for food, rent etc and potentially squirrel a tiny amount away each pay day to begin to build a comfort blanket. It is clear the preferred industry will be in a mess for time to come and so a period of time doing anything that pays has to be the way forward. Too simple?


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 30, 2020)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Surely the bottom line would be to get a job and some regular income coming in. Surely even working in a supermarket, cleaning job etc will pay more per week than UC and with a guaranteed salary coming in weekly/monthly it is far easier to budget for food, rent etc and potentially squirrel a tiny amount away each pay day to begin to build a comfort blanket. It is clear the preferred industry will be in a mess for time to come and so a period of time doing anything that pays has to be the way forward. Too simple?
		
Click to expand...

Is that what your wife is contemplating?


----------



## Blue in Munich (Jul 30, 2020)

Foxholer said:



			Is that what your wife is contemplating?
		
Click to expand...

Does she have to if the other bread winner in the family can provide; I believe there was only one bread winner in the OP's son's household?


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 30, 2020)

Foxholer said:



			Is that what your wife is contemplating?
		
Click to expand...

She was but things have taken a very peculiar twist regarding her role at the school and it looks as though she is going to be doing something different (and involving cleaning/houskeeping) but is a role that would keep her in a place she loves working out but also a £5k pay cut and change to term time. Negotiations are still going on and it is a million miles from HR but given a choice between a cleaning role, pay cut but keeping a role in these times it's a no brainer. We're waiting on final salary details including the pro-rata effect of term time to see if it's viable as like most we still have bills to pay and need to put food on the table. If not she's already looking at roles for Waitrose (they have a massive presence in Bracknell as their main distribution centre so shelf picking, cleaning) and what supermarket roles are out there locally


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 30, 2020)

GreiginFife said:



			Maybe your son should have had some savings then.
Being self employed was his choice after all, no one forced him in to it and with it comes the drawbacks like payments being made late or on terms past invoice.

If he'd had a simple PAYE job then it's unlikely his pay would be late and none of this would matter.
		
Click to expand...

You are joking...savings...you do know that a huge number of people don't have £100 to their name at the end of every month.  This may be from 2016 but I doubt things are much different today.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37504449 

And yes - the self-employed expect some uncertainly about when money is received.  My point is that in the circumstances of the lockdown and so many having to claim UC - the UC system might have  been relexed to recognise the issue of the self-employed and the timing of their last income.   Maybe considered it as savings...


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 30, 2020)

Surely even £5 a week (cost of a pint around here) is manageable to save for 99% of households. I think it comes down to a lack of intent and people being able to get easy credit and so too many are spend, spend, spend even on credit and then worry about paying it off somewhere over the rainbow. It is something we have been guilty of as well running up not insignificant credit card bills and then I got made redundant so it does become a battle. These days, if I can't afford it now I have to save until I can


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 30, 2020)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Surely the bottom line would be to get a job and some regular income coming in. Surely even working in a supermarket, cleaning job etc will pay more per week than UC and with a guaranteed salary coming in weekly/monthly it is far easier to budget for food, rent etc and potentially squirrel a tiny amount away each pay day to begin to build a comfort blanket. It is clear the preferred industry will be in a mess for time to come and so a period of time doing anything that pays has to be the way forward. Too simple?
		
Click to expand...

My point is not about the level of UC.  It is not about the looking for work, or indeed the support that those on UC get in identifying training and opportunities.  It's not about any of these - or indeed anything to do with UC in normal times.  It's simply about the final income payment for work prior to registering for UC as an individual's job goes down the plughole - especially in the cliff-edge circumstances of the lockdown.  That's all.


----------



## chellie (Jul 30, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			You are joking...savings...you do know that a huge number of people don't have £100 to their name at the end of every month.  This may be from 2016 but I doubt things are much different today.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37504449 

And yes - the self-employed expect some uncertainly about when money is received.  My point is that in the circumstances of the lockdown and so many having to claim UC - the UC system might have  been relexed to recognise the issue of the self-employed and the timing of their last income.   Maybe considered it as savings...
		
Click to expand...

If he stopped smoking he could save


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 30, 2020)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Surely even £5 a week (cost of a pint around here) is manageable to save for 99% of households. I think it comes down to a lack of intent and people being able to get easy credit and so too many are spend, spend, spend even on credit and then worry about paying it off somewhere over the rainbow. It is something we have been guilty of as well running up not insignificant credit card bills and then I got made redundant so it does become a battle. These days, if I can't afford it now I have to save until I can
		
Click to expand...

You might well think that - but when you are scraping along on very little - that £5 you might be able to put behind might build up to £40 over two months.  Well that's great - but it's not going to go far if something goes wrong.  And the £100 that the 16m have at the end of the month is not an additional £100 every month - it is £100 in total.  That's it.  That's all they've got for the rainy day.   Why else do we have foodbanks.  A lot of people in the UK live in a very different world to those of us a lot more fortunate.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 30, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			My point is not about the level of UC.  It is not about the looking for work, or indeed the support that those on UC get in identifying training and opportunities.  It's not about any of these - or indeed anything to do with UC in normal times.  It's simply about the final income payment for work prior to registering for UC as an individual's job goes down the plughole - especially in the cliff-edge circumstances of the lockdown.  That's all.
		
Click to expand...

The harsh reality is those are the rules whether it is right or wrong they aren't going to change any time soon and no amount of bleating on here will change your son's situation. I don't mean to be blunt but you constantly moan about how hard done by he's been but is he alone? What has he done since UC to change the situation in terms of job hunting. You have to cut your cloth accordingly and if he is a smoker as per the post above then I'm sorry but that is simply cash going up in smoke


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jul 30, 2020)

How many of us in their 20’s had much in the way of savings?

Silh is totally wrong about the income/savings argument he has put forward on here, but let’s not pretend we were all as good as gold with money when we were young.

I do casework for the RBL and I can assure you, he is not alone having zero savings and I see all ages from 20’s to 80+.


----------



## pauljames87 (Jul 30, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			You are joking...savings...you do know that a huge number of people don't have £100 to their name at the end of every month.  This may be from 2016 but I doubt things are much different today.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37504449 

And yes - the self-employed expect some uncertainly about when money is received.  My point is that in the circumstances of the lockdown and so many having to claim UC - the UC system might have  been relexed to recognise the issue of the self-employed and the timing of their last income.   Maybe considered it as savings...
		
Click to expand...

Articles like this really make me appreciate what I have. My parents always bang on about saving saving saving.... I always thought what I put away wasn't much but it's more than £100


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 30, 2020)

chellie said:



			If he stopped smoking he could save
		
Click to expand...

yeh - that's it. That's the answer.  And he can get rid of his telly, and stop using his cooker...and stop drinking - ah hold on - he doesn't drink...and as he says - even if he fancied a pint he could't justify it.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 30, 2020)

pauldj42 said:



			How many of us in their 20’s had much in the way of savings?

Silh is totally wrong about the income/savings argument he has put forward on here, but let’s not pretend we were all as good as gold with money when we were young.

I do casework for the RBL and I can assure you, he is not alone having zero savings and I see all ages from 20’s to 80+.
		
Click to expand...

I get that and as I've said I was as irresponsible as many others and HID and I have a five figure credit card balance hanging over us which has created a host of issues along the way. Fortunately we've found a way out of that mess eventually and have learned a salutary life lesson along the way. We don't save masses now and definitely haven't got anything significant tucked away but we're trying much harder these days to be more prudent and stick a few quid by whenever we get a chance. I agree that many kids, 20 somethings and even people older than that didn't get taught the benefit of saving for a rainy day and have had a spend now worry later attitude. Perhaps it is something that some households will take out of this Covid mess and begin to do


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 30, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			yeh - that's it. That's the answer.  And he can get rid of his telly, and stop using his cooker...and stop drinking - ah hold on - he doesn't drink...and as he says - even if he fancied a pint he could't justify it.
		
Click to expand...

But it is it. How much is a pack of fags or a packet of rolling tobacco and papers? Money much needed elsewhere no?


----------



## GreiginFife (Jul 30, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			You are joking...savings...you do know that a huge number of people don't have £100 to their name at the end of every month.  This may be from 2016 but I doubt things are much different today.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37504449

And yes - the self-employed expect some uncertainly about when money is received.  My point is that in the circumstances of the lockdown and so many having to claim UC - the UC system might have  been relexed to recognise the issue of the self-employed and the timing of their last income.   Maybe considered it as savings...
		
Click to expand...

Yes, savings. Plenty do you know. 

Lockdown has not changed the system, its not even changed that some self employed people get late payments. Its not the government's fault, nor frankly their issue, the system is the same system as it was a year ago. 

Stop blaming lockdown and the government for your son's predicament.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 30, 2020)

pauldj42 said:



			How many of us in their 20’s had much in the way of savings?

Silh is totally wrong about the income/savings argument he has put forward on here, but let’s not pretend we were all as good as gold with money when we were young.

I do casework for the RBL and I can assure you, he is not alone having zero savings and I see all ages from 20’s to 80+.
		
Click to expand...

The income/savings argument is very simply in respect of the work shut-down circumstances of the lockdown.  No wider than that.  

And it's not that we shouldn't be able to have £6000 of savings to still qualify for full UC - for some £6000 in savings is unimaginable.  But for income that any individual was due at the end of March 2020 but for whatever reason was delayed until after the individual registered for UC - that final income could surely have been considered by the UC system in the same way as £6k of savings...that's all.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 30, 2020)

GreiginFife said:



			Yes, savings. Plenty do you know.

Lockdown has not changed the system, its not even changed that some self employed people get late payments. Its not the government's fault, nor frankly their issue, the system is the same system as it was a year ago.

Stop blaming lockdown and the government for your son's predicament.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not - and he's not in a predicament.  His career is in a mess - he will sort something else out - he already is - as many will do.  But there are many in his situation who do not have a Bank of MaD to get support from meanwhile.   I was simply thinking that when registering for UC an individual could have stated income due - and as long as that was less than £6k then that income could have been classified as savings - and it would have helped them over that first 5weeks to the first UC payment. 

And that's the main point of what I've actually been posting about.


----------



## Hobbit (Jul 30, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I'm not - and he's not in a predicament.  His career is in a mess - he will sort something else out - he already is - as many will do.  But there are many in his situation who do not have a Bank of MaD to get support from meanwhile.   I was simply thinking that when registering for UC an individual could have stated income due - and as long as that was less than £6k then that income could have been classified as savings - and it would have helped them over that first 5weeks to the first UC payment.

And that's the main point of what I've actually been posting about.
		
Click to expand...

But as you’ve just said, it’s “income.” Its not savings, and income impacts on UC.

I dare say if he’d took his papers into the job centre and it showed he’d just received an income his UC would have been impacted back then.

And let’s be honest here, there’s no way on God’s earth your son would have saved that money. When was the last time he saved anything of note? Certainly not in the last few years as according to you he’s always broke. Therefore it was/is income. And the rules are....


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jul 30, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			The income/savings argument is very simply in respect of the work shut-down circumstances of the lockdown.  No wider than that. 

And it's not that we shouldn't be able to have £6000 of savings to still qualify for full UC - for some £6000 in savings is unimaginable.  But for income that any individual was due at the end of March 2020 but for whatever reason was delayed until after the individual registered for UC - that final income could surely have been considered by the UC system in the same way as £6k of savings...that's all.
		
Click to expand...

No, No and No again, as you say it’s income, to want to use it as savings is a lie.

I sympathise with anyone in his predicament, but to want to pretend it’s savings rather than income is not on.


----------



## Stuart_C (Jul 30, 2020)

pauldj42 said:



			No, No and No again, as you say it’s income, to want to use it as savings is a lie.

I sympathise with anyone in his predicament, but to want to pretend it’s savings rather than income is not on.
		
Click to expand...

I have no experience  in the benefit system so I might be wrong.

I can see his point, his lad has earnt his wages, paid the correct amount of tax on them just not received the payment when it was due which is way out of his control. 

It's not right he should lose out imo but cannot expect the UC system to change the rules just to suit him.

On another point, Do people really expect someone to throw away a career at the first sign of adversity after putting so many years into it?


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 30, 2020)

Stuart_C said:



			I have no experience  in the benefit system so I might be wrong.

I can see his point, his lad has earnt his wages, paid the correct amount of tax on them just not received the payment when it was due which is way out of his control.

It's not right he should lose out imo but cannot expect the UC system to change the rules just to suit him.

*On another point, Do people really expect someone to throw away a career at the first sign of adversity after putting so many years into it?*

Click to expand...

When needs must you have to do what is necessary, you can always go back to it when the time is right.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jul 30, 2020)

Stuart_C said:



			I have no experience  in the benefit system so I might be wrong.

I can see his point, his lad has earnt his wages, paid the correct amount of tax on them just not received the payment when it was due which is way out of his control.

It's not right he should lose out imo but cannot expect the UC system to change the rules just to suit him.

On another point, Do people really expect someone to throw away a career at the first sign of adversity after putting so many years into it?
		
Click to expand...

He’s not losing out Stu, if he’d of got paid this money at the beginning he wouldn’t of been entitled to, or needed UC.
But you legally have to declare income and as it has come in whilst drawing UC he asked why he couldn’t call it savings and still get UC for that period as well, ie, get 2 lots of income, one off the back of the tax payer.

I agree about his career, but until successful enough to fund himself maybe his dad shouldn’t share his woes on a public forum.


----------



## Wolf (Jul 30, 2020)

Stuart_C said:



			I have no experience  in the benefit system so I might be wrong.

I can see his point, his lad has earnt his wages, paid the correct amount of tax on them just not received the payment when it was due which is way out of his control.

It's not right he should lose out imo but cannot expect the UC system to change the rules just to suit him.

On another point, *Do people really expect someone to throw away a career at the first sign of adversity after putting so many years into it?*

Click to expand...

No, but over 2 years of it being posted about on this forum alone, not to mention in those posts it suggests that adversity has been going on a lot longer than that would alone suggest some harsh lessons need to be learned.

There's nothing to stop him getting work in another industry and carrying on his passion on the side until such time it becomes financially viable to go full time again.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 30, 2020)

Anyone working in the entertainment, media business is hard pressed to earn a decent living. Both of my sisters boys went into the tv/film industry on leaving uni and the only way they survived until they had made good contacts and worked up from the bottom was courtesy of the bank of mum and dad, luckily they had more than enough to support them. 

Silh's son would know this and I doubt he would be in a position to save any money but I agree with others, he should have looked for other work as soon as he could in the current climate and then reverted back as soon as was feasible. Funny that my Tesco delivery driver told me this morning that a month before lockdown he had just signed a lease on a pub and even before a month was out he had to deliver groceries to earn money to live on.


----------



## Stuart_C (Jul 30, 2020)

pauldj42 said:



			He’s not losing out Stu, if he’d of got paid this money at the beginning he wouldn’t of been entitled to, or needed UC.
But you legally have to declare income and as it has come in whilst drawing UC he asked why he couldn’t call it savings and still get UC for that period as well, ie, get 2 lots of income, one off the back of the tax payer.

I agree about his career, but until successful enough to fund himself maybe his dad shouldn’t share his woes on a public forum.
		
Click to expand...

Again excuse my ignorance  but I genuinely have no idea of benefits.... Hypothetically now,  had he been paid (£900) on time and applied for UC are you saying he wouldnt qualify for a giro? But if he had £6k in the bank as savings he would?


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jul 30, 2020)

Stuart_C said:



			Again excuse my ignorance  but I genuinely have no idea of benefits.... Hypothetically now,  had he been paid (£900) on time and applied for UC are you saying he wouldnt qualify for a giro? But if he had £6k in the bank as savings he would?
		
Click to expand...

You have to declare income and savings, you are allowed up savings of up to 6K (or 16K for a couple) and it doesn’t affect your application, for every £250.00 over 6K you lose £1.00 off the benefit.

UC is meant to help towards Living costs if you are unemployed or on a low income, there are other benefits and entitlements, but they depend on the individual circumstances.

He wouldn’t of qualified for UC for the period the £900 was meant to cover. He’d get a work allowance before UC is reduced by 63p for every £1.00 you earn.

It’s not straightforward as UC can include housing allowance or other benefits etc:


----------



## Stuart_C (Jul 30, 2020)

Wolf said:



			No, but over 2 years of it being posted about on this forum alone, not to mention in those posts it suggests that adversity has been going on a lot longer than that would alone suggest some harsh lessons need to be learned.

There's nothing to stop him getting work in another industry and carrying on his passion on the side until such time it becomes financially viable to go full time again.
		
Click to expand...

You have a point. 

I dont know the industry inside out but to be successful I doubt you could  do it "on the side" as you suggest.  I get the industry is one where you need to have proven experience to be really successful and for a lad of his age it will take time to get that experience. I dont envy his position to be fair.

At least he's paid into the pot prior to this


----------



## Stuart_C (Jul 30, 2020)

pauldj42 said:



			You have to declare income and savings, you are allowed up savings of up to 6K (or 16K for a couple) and it doesn’t affect your application, for every £250.00 over 6K you lose £1.00 off the benefit.

UC is meant to help towards Living costs if you are unemployed or on a low income, there are other benefits and entitlements, but they depend on the individual circumstances.

He wouldn’t of qualified for UC for the period the £900 was meant to cover. He’d get a work allowance before UC is reduced by 63p for every £1.00 you earn.

It’s not straightforward as UC can include housing allowance or other benefits etc:
		
Click to expand...

That seems mad that having £6k savings doesnt affect your application but a late payment of taxed wages (£900) would. 

Anyway, my head hurting now so I'll bow out.

Good luck SILH you're getting no sympathy here 😂😂


----------



## GreiginFife (Jul 30, 2020)

Stuart_C said:



			That seems mad that having £6k savings doesnt affect your application but a late payment of taxed wages (£900) would.

Anyway, my head hurting now so I'll bow out.

Good luck SILH you're getting no sympathy here 😂😂
		
Click to expand...

Self employed so no tax will have been paid. I may be paid later but for now that is gross income. 
But apparently being self employed is a life choice and we just have to take the drawbacks that come with that on the chin because its what we chose to do.


----------



## Stuart_C (Jul 30, 2020)

GreiginFife said:



*Self employed so no tax will have been paid. *I may be paid later but for now that is gross income.
But apparently being self employed is a life choice and we just have to take the drawbacks that come with that on the chin because its what we chose to do.
		
Click to expand...

Doubt that unless he's set up as a LTD company then he'd be entitled to furlough,no?

I'd be surprised if he's been paid gross....does the arts and entertainment business have anything like CIS?

Self employment isnt a choice in the construction industry, almost everything is subbied out these days. I'd expect the arts  and entertainment to be the same.


----------



## GreiginFife (Jul 30, 2020)

Stuart_C said:



			Doubt that unless he's set up as a LTD company then he'd be entitled to furlough,no?

I'd be surprised if he's been paid gross....does the arts and entertainment business have anything like CIS?

Self employment isnt a choice in the construction industry, almost everything is subbied out these days. I'd expect the arts  and entertainment to be the same.
		
Click to expand...

Sole trader set up in January, or so another thread implies.


----------



## Stuart_C (Jul 30, 2020)

GreiginFife said:



			Sole trader set up in January, or so another thread implies.
		
Click to expand...

Ah right theres more?? 🤨

I'd expect some sort of tax payment scheme that would make all payments from agents/agency's deduct 20% at source.


----------



## GreiginFife (Jul 30, 2020)

Stuart_C said:



			Ah right theres more?? 🤨

I'd expect some sort of tax payment scheme that would make all payments from agents/agency's deduct 20% at source.
		
Click to expand...

Not sure its an industry as scrupulous as that. But hey ho.


----------



## drdel (Jul 30, 2020)

This thread is just repeating.

IMO the OP has stopped listening and is now gone into denial.

Any sums recieved for 'work done is income, business operating costs are deductible, that is all that concerns the HMRC and others.

Over a year ago I warned the entertainment game is fickle and strewn with bankrupt businesses: many by design. I strongly advised over a year ago that "the first loss is the best loss" : the OP's son obviously does not have capital reserves to survive in the sector where late payment is the norm, nepotism and internships are prevalent.

I have a few friends who are agents  and promoters in this game. The harsh reality is he'd need to have enough capital fo finance himself for at least a year and be prepared for 'dry' spells of 4 or 5 months.

Move on and do it as a hobby.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 31, 2020)

drdel said:



			This thread is just repeating.

IMO the OP has stopped listening and is now gone into denial.

Any sums recieved for 'work done is income, business operating costs are deductible, that is all that concerns the HMRC and others.

Over a year ago I warned the entertainment game is fickle and strewn with bankrupt businesses: many by design. I strongly advised over a year ago that "the first loss is the best loss" : the OP's son obviously does not have capital reserves to survive in the sector where late payment is the norm, nepotism and internships are prevalent.

I have a few friends who are agents  and promoters in this game. The harsh reality is he'd need to have enough capital fo finance himself for at least a year and be prepared for 'dry' spells of 4 or 5 months.

Move on and do it as a hobby.
		
Click to expand...

Which is what he is doing at the moment as he looks for a new career,  but you'll note that that is not what my OP was about.   It was about how one very specific UC assessment rule would impact individuals in the unprecedented and unforeseen circumstances of the lockdown.

And just as it happens...a report out today...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53599763


----------



## Slab (Jul 31, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			You are joking...savings...you do know that a huge number of people don't have £100 to their name at the end of every month.  This may be from 2016 but I doubt things are much different today.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37504449

And yes - the self-employed expect some uncertainly about when money is received.  *1]* *My point is that in the circumstances of the lockdown and so many having to claim UC - the UC system might have  been relexed to recognise the issue of the self-employed and the timing of their last income.   Maybe considered it as savings...*

Click to expand...




SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			My point is not about the level of UC.  It is not about the looking for work, or indeed the support that those on UC get in identifying training and opportunities.  It's not about any of these - or indeed anything to do with UC in normal times.  *2]** It's simply about the final income payment for work prior to registering for UC as an individual's job goes down the plughole -* especially in the cliff-edge circumstances of the lockdown.  That's all.
		
Click to expand...

1] If as you say your son never considered/used *any *of his previous self employed earnings as savings why should the UC calculation consider the last one as savings?
2] Same thing; By your own admission *All* his previous income/payments went down the plughole too, why change the UC system for this last bit of income?

Your solution is way way bigger than the problem


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 31, 2020)

Slab said:



			1] If as you say your son never considered/used *any *of his previous self employed earnings as savings why should the UC calculation consider the last one as savings?
2] Same thing; By your own admission *All* his previous income/payments went down the plughole too, why change the UC system for this last bit of income?

Your solution is way way bigger than the problem
		
Click to expand...

For those with little or no savings to fall back on it would have provided them with the funds to bridge the 5weeks to the first UC payment.  That's all.  Those with £6k savings would not have that same issue to deal with.


----------



## Slab (Jul 31, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			For those with little or no savings to fall back on it would have provided them with the funds to bridge the 5weeks to the first UC payment.  That's all.  Those with £6k savings would not have that same issue to deal with.
		
Click to expand...

I think you're just too close and can't see this impartially. Income is not savings, you cant ask them to say _'don't worry about it we'll just call it savings cos there's a pandemic' _ while it might sounds sensible for your son's specific predicament it is not a practical process change

The welfare system is for reduced/no income, no part of that system can ever be set up to ignore income received after a claim is made or give that income another name... and still get unchanged welfare


----------



## Hobbit (Jul 31, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			For those with little or no savings to fall back on it would have provided them with the funds to bridge the 5weeks to the first UC payment.  That's all.  Those with £6k savings would not have that same issue to deal with.
		
Click to expand...

Going off at a tangent, and perhaps alluding to something you posted in a previous thread, if he had no savings who was going to pay his self-employed tax bill at year end? You, again?


----------



## 3offTheTee (Jul 31, 2020)

Find it difficult to believe the thread is still rumbling on.

1. There is an old saying SILH and apologies as I know your beliefs, “The Lord helps those who help themselves”! Relevant here. 
2. Have you responded to my post #191?


----------



## funkycoldmedina (Jul 31, 2020)

Stuart_C said:



			I have no experience  in the benefit system so I might be wrong.

I can see his point, his lad has earnt his wages, paid the correct amount of tax on them just not received the payment when it was due which is way out of his control.

It's not right he should lose out imo but cannot expect the UC system to change the rules just to suit him.

On another point, Do people really expect someone to throw away a career at the first sign of adversity after putting so many years into it?
		
Click to expand...

Don't come in here being all reasonable, the forum is having an SILH pile on with the added fun of digging his son out.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 31, 2020)

Hobbit said:



			Going off at a tangent, and perhaps alluding to something you posted in a previous thread, if he had no savings who was going to pay his self-employed tax bill at year end? You, again?
		
Click to expand...

Just on this tangent  He had his guaranteed employed work and self-employed he had solid bookings supporting touring bands and acts from March to July - with much of the rest of the year pencilled-in.  He would have easily had sufficient to pay his tax bill for 2019-2020 - which will not be much in any case.  He'd paid his tax bill for 2018-2019.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 31, 2020)

3offTheTee said:



			Find it difficult to believe the thread is still rumbling on.

1. There is an old saying SILH and apologies as I know your beliefs, “The Lord helps those who help themselves”! Relevant here.
2. Have you responded to my post #191?
		
Click to expand...

1.  Indeed - why he is helping himself...currently sorting out work and other sources of income.
2.  Your questions have got nothing to do with my original post.  However - he knows he must get a job in August, as he is desperate to get off UC.

And I will note - as I have previously noted but seemingly ignored.  Given his level of earnings, my lad could have claimed UC to top up his earnings for at least the three years leading up to March of this year,  but he did not do so as he did not want to have any dependency on the state - unlike many who are more than happy to claim every benefit or tax deductible allowance that they are due.  So where there is cynicism or criticism on here, perhaps it should be directed at them.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 31, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			For those with little or no savings to fall back on it would have provided them with the funds to bridge the 5weeks to the first UC payment.  That's all.  Those with £6k savings would not have that same issue to deal with.
		
Click to expand...

Anyone going on to UC can apply for funds earlier than the 5 weeks you quoted.


----------



## Wolf (Jul 31, 2020)

Old Skier said:



			Anyone going on to UC can apply for funds earlier than the 5 weeks you quoted.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed they can but its one of the huge flaws in the system. They get granted the funds early and usually can have up to the maximum amount of their claim., however it screws them over if they do it, because its not an advance of UC funds, its classified as a budgeting loan so when they start getting their actual UC payments 5 weeks later a proportionate amount is deducted from it to repay the loan, which often leaves many people short and struggling until the next payment so another loan is needed and more gets deducted again next time. Its an absolute vicious circle for anyone that takes the option to do that and will often end up owing a debt more back to government in loans than they can afford to pay back.

This is where it needs addressing to help people get access tother own funds faster without needing the budgeting loans which end up crippling them and prevents them being able to survive.


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 31, 2020)

Wolf said:



			Indeed they can but its one of the huge flaws in the system. They get granted the funds early and usually can have up to the maximum amount of their claim., however it screws them over if they do it, because its not an advance of UC funds, its classified as a budgeting loan so when they start getting their actual UC payments 5 weeks later a proportionate amount is deducted from it to repay the loan, which often leaves many people short and struggling until the next payment so another loan is needed and more gets deducted again next time. Its an absolute vicious circle for anyone that takes the option to do that and will often end up owing a debt more back to government in loans than they can afford to pay back.

This is where it needs addressing to help people get access tother own funds faster without needing the budgeting loans which end up crippling them and prevents them being able to survive.
		
Click to expand...

I don't quite understand the full ramifications of your post, but agree with its gist. While I'm inclined to believe it's actually better than what it replaced, I believe there's a certain amount of 'tweaking' that would make it 'fairer'. I know a couple of, quite frugal, UC claimants who have ended up having to borrow money to pay their 'leccy because of 'deductions' they neither understood nor (obviously) had 'budgeted' for!


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 31, 2020)

Wolf said:



			Indeed they can but its one of the huge flaws in the system. They get granted the funds early and usually can have up to the maximum amount of their claim., however it screws them over if they do it, because its not an advance of UC funds, its classified as a budgeting loan so when they start getting their actual UC payments 5 weeks later a proportionate amount is deducted from it to repay the loan, which often leaves many people short and struggling until the next payment so another loan is needed and more gets deducted again next time. Its an absolute vicious circle for anyone that takes the option to do that and will often end up owinga debt more back to government in loans than they can afford to pay back.

This is where it needs addressing to help people get access tother own funds faster without needing yhr budgeting loans which end up crippling them and prevents them being able to survive.
		
Click to expand...

I honestly thought the loan could be repaid over a period of time and not as a one of lump sum.  I also think that the 5 weeks was being reduced due to the increase staffing that was put in place.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 31, 2020)

Foxholer said:



			I don't quite understand the full ramifications of your post, but agree with its gist. While I'm inclined to believe it's actually better than what it replaced, I believe there's a certain amount of 'tweaking' that would make it 'fairer'. I know a couple of, quite frugal, UC claimants who have ended up having to borrow money to pay their 'leccy because of 'deductions' they neither understood nor (obviously) had 'budgeted' for!
		
Click to expand...

The area of priority debts not getting paid is of great concern at the moment within the charity sector and one of the more annoying things that is not commonly known is that the utilities have a specific organisation set up to assist and in some cases write off some debts.


----------



## Wolf (Jul 31, 2020)

Foxholer said:



			I don't quite understand the full ramifications of your post, but agree with its gist. While I'm inclined to believe it's actually better than what it replaced, I believe there's a certain amount of 'tweaking' that would make it 'fairer'. I know a couple of, quite frugal, UC claimants who have ended up having to borrow money to pay their 'leccy because of 'deductions' they neither understood nor (obviously) had 'budgeted' for!
		
Click to expand...

Basically you don't get an advance you get a loan which is paid back out of your monthly UC Benefit, but its quite a chunk they take so leaves people short and end up borrowing more to replace what they lost and means losing more next time. Its a vicious cycle of creating government owed debt but using your benefits asnthe collateral to borrow against. A very odd way of doing it.

It is definitely an improvement on the old JSA system but it still has a lot of ironing out needed.



Old Skier said:



			I honestly thought the loan could be repaid over a period of time and not as a one of lump sum.  I also think that the 5 weeks was being reduced due to the increase staffing that was put in place.
		
Click to expand...

It is paid back over a period of time but that period is from every subsequent benefit payment you get and its quite a chunk for example when I unfortunately had to claim due to redundancy I was entitled to the princely sum of £345 a month, but if i wanted a budgeting loan of the same amount to cover me for 5 weeks whilst waiting for UC it was worked out I would have had to sacrifice £65 a month out of that £345 until paid off, leaving me with £280 per month which would have had to cover all my outgoings, food etc. Fortunately I didn't take the option or make it as far as the 1st payment as I got back into work. But sacrificing £65 a month into the ether is a lot when you have nothing coming in and is how it ends up with people requiring mkresnd more budgeting loans until their benefit is pretty much 50% of their entitlement and food banks get utilised just to survive.


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 31, 2020)

Wolf said:



			Basically you don't get an advance you get a loan which is paid back out of your monthly UC Benefit, but its quite a chunk they take so leaves people short and end up borrowing more to replace what they lost and means losing more next time. Its a vicious cycle of creating government owed debt but using your benefits asnthe collateral to borrow against. A very odd way of doing it.

It is definitely an improvement on the old JSA system but it still has a lot of ironing out needed.


It is paid back over a period of time but that period is from every subsequent benefit payment you get and its quite a chunk for example when I unfortunately had to claim due to redundancy I was entitled to the princely sum of £345 a month, but if i wanted a budgeting loan of the same amount to cover me for 5 weeks whilst waiting for UC it was worked out I would have had to sacrifice £65 a month out of that £345 until paid off, leaving me with £280 per month which would have had to cover all my outgoings, food etc. Fortunately I didn't take the option or make it as far as the 1st payment as I got back into work. But sacrificing £65 a month into the ether is a lot when you have nothing coming in and is how it ends up with people requiring mkresnd more budgeting loans until their benefit is pretty much 50% of their entitlement and food banks get utilised just to survive.
		
Click to expand...

You are not telling me anything I didn't already know!
I've occasionally 'temporarily supported' a couple of folk who have been in that situation, for 1 reason or another - never really 'their fault'; it's simply 'the system'!


----------



## Wolf (Jul 31, 2020)

Foxholer said:



			You are not telling me anything I didn't already know!
I've occasionally 'temporarily supported' a couple of folk who have been in that situation, for 1 reason or another - never really '*their fault'; it's simply 'the system'!*

Click to expand...

I don't really buy that line with people though, system is flawed and the loan side is one of those flaws, but the biggest flaw with it is the people who believe its always the fault of the system. Nobody is forced into a budgeting loan and plenty believe they should get more and forget the fact it is only a safety net its not a replacement of income to be relied on and live comfortably off.
People need to ensure they listen properly to the guidelines and understand what they're signing or applying for, its not the systems fault they're out of work and it's not the system responsible for getting them back in work or giving them the life they're accustomed to. People need to do that themselves and that's the biggest flaw with any benefit systems and why there will always be those that think their situation is different  and its the system punishing them the OP being a good example of that.


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 31, 2020)

Wolf said:



			I don't really buy that line with people though, system is flawed and the loan side is one of those flaws, but the biggest flaw with it is the people who believe its always the fault of the system. Nobody is forced into a budgeting loan and plenty believe they should get more and forget the fact it is only a safety net its not a replacement of income to be relied on and live comfortably off.
People need to ensure they listen properly to the guidelines and understand what they're signing or applying for, its not the systems fault they're out of work and it's not the system responsible for getting them back in work or giving them the life they're accustomed to. People need to do that themselves and that's the biggest flaw with any benefit systems and why there will always be those that think their situation is different  and its the system punishing them the OP being a good example of that.
		
Click to expand...

That would be fine if the 'victims' were in a position to take alternative action. Unfortunately, for precisely the reason they are on UC, they are not! And if they can't find some sort of benefactor, albeit/even a temporary one, they are truly in deep doodoo!


----------



## Wolf (Jul 31, 2020)

Foxholer said:



			That would be fine if the 'victims' were in a position to take alternative action. Unfortunately, for precisely the reason they are on UC, they are not! And if they can't find some sort of benefactor, albeit/even a temporary one, they are truly in deep doodoo!
		
Click to expand...

In that case then they're destined to always suffer at hands of the system. Hopefully they get an upturn in their futures at some point as I feel for any genuine cases such as those in this case where there isn't an alternative to seek better income


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 31, 2020)

Wolf said:



			I don't really buy that line with people though, system is flawed and the loan side is one of those flaws, but the biggest flaw with it is the people who believe its always the fault of the system. Nobody is forced into a budgeting loan and plenty believe they should get more and forget the fact it is only a safety net its not a replacement of income to be relied on and live comfortably off.
People need to ensure they listen properly to the guidelines and understand what they're signing or applying for, its not the systems fault they're out of work and it's not the system responsible for getting them back in work or giving them the life they're accustomed to. People need to do that themselves and that's the biggest flaw with any benefit systems and why there will always be those that think their situation is different  and its the system punishing them the OP being a good example of that.
		
Click to expand...

I agree - and I repeat - the only issue was one brought about by the sudden lockdown and the fact that income due for work done before registering does not get treated the same as savings.   The government waived many things and helped out many in many ways.  Maybe it could have helped those due payment for work done before lockdown who found themselves having to register for UC before that payment was received. 

And I was suggesting nothing more.  But it didn't happen and the moment has gone.  Anyway - the best thing any claimant of UC can do (when income is pending) is to get off UC before the income comes through.  Sorted


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 31, 2020)

I still think given this has been rumbling on for two years or more and SILH bailing his son out everytime there is a denial in his lack of responsibility to even consider there may be dark times ahead and work not always being there even before this Covid situation came to pass. He clearly has no idea about money management and has always thought the parents would see him right. Simple as that and it has nothing to do with UC but a failing on SILH's son


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jul 31, 2020)

HomerJSimpson said:



			I still think given this has been rumbling on for two years or more and SILH bailing his son out everytime there is a denial in his lack of responsibility to even consider there may be dark times ahead and work not always being there even before this Covid situation came to pass. He clearly has no idea about money management and has always thought the parents would see him right. Simple as that and it has nothing to do with UC but a failing on SILH's son
		
Click to expand...

Rude! And out of order, imo.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jul 31, 2020)

pauldj42 said:



			Rude! And out of order, imo.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry you see it that way but do you disagree that the son could have done more in work to plan for a rainy day, especially given the fickle nature of the work he was in. It has been rumbling on and SILH has bailed him out regularly in the two year period so perhaps he's simply taken it for granted the bank of mum and dad would always be there


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jul 31, 2020)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Sorry you see it that way but do you disagree that the son could have done more in work to plan for a rainy day, especially given the fickle nature of the work he was in. It has been rumbling on and SILH has bailed him out regularly in the two year period so perhaps he's simply taken it for granted the bank of mum and dad would always be there
		
Click to expand...

I wouldn’t dare to tell another poster his son (or daughter) are taking advantage of them and to state he has no idea how to manage money.

We get what silh tells us and don’t know his son’s motives.

Would you like it if we questioned your marriage on the basis of you discussing possibly hiding what you spend without telling your wife? Money management


----------



## drdel (Jul 31, 2020)

pauldj42 said:



			I wouldn’t dare to tell another poster his son (or daughter) are taking advantage of them and to state he has no idea how to manage money.

We get what silh tells us and don’t know his son’s motives.

Would you like it if we questioned your marriage on the basis of you discussing possibly hiding what you spend without telling your wife? Money management

Click to expand...

Surely the point is that SILH has chosen to broadcast the subject on a public forum knowing full well that posters will shoot from the 'hip' and not hold back.

Revealing such private family matters may not have been the most prudent subject to put up for debate.


----------



## Pants (Jul 31, 2020)

drdel said:



			Surely the point is that SILH has chosen to broadcast the subject on a public forum knowing full well that posters will shoot from the 'hip' and not hold back.

Revealing such private family matters may not have been the most prudent subject to put up for debate.
		
Click to expand...

TBH, this thread doesn't come close to what Homer has posted about his private life over the years .......


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jul 31, 2020)

drdel said:



			Surely the point is that SILH has chosen to broadcast the subject on a public forum knowing full well that posters will shoot from the 'hip' and not hold back.

Revealing such private family matters may not have been the most prudent subject to put up for debate.
		
Click to expand...

I believe there’s a difference between offering an opinion as as you rightly say SILH has chosen to post, and making comments on somebody he has never met and knows nothing about SILH’s relationship with his son.

“He *clearly* has no idea about money management and *has always thought* the parents would see him right. Simple as that and it has nothing to do with UC but a *failing* on SILH's son”

To use the words in bold Homer must know his son very well.


----------



## Hobbit (Aug 1, 2020)

pauldj42 said:



			I believe there’s a difference between offering an opinion as as you rightly say SILH has chosen to post, and making comments on somebody he has never met and knows nothing about SILH’s relationship with his son.

“He *clearly* has no idea about money management and *has always thought* the parents would see him right. Simple as that and it has nothing to do with UC but a *failing* on SILH's son”

To use the words in bold Homer must know his son very well.
		
Click to expand...

110% agree.

How Hogie manages that relationship has nothing to do with anyone on here. But I do feel that there is middle ground here. If your best buddy told you, time after time, they were digging out their child you might suggest something, but only suggest. It might be a "yes but.." affirming their action but questioning what about trying.

My short answer would be, "again?" And let them think it over. If it then became a 2 year why, why, why, my "again" would be more than just "again."


----------



## Stuart_C (Aug 1, 2020)

Pants said:



			TBH, this thread doesn't come close to what Homer has posted about his private life over the years .......
		
Click to expand...

This. Then when someone responds and he doesn't like it he goes crying to the mods.

I think Homer sees this thread to have a pop at SILH.


----------



## Pants (Aug 1, 2020)

Stuart_C said:



			This. Then when someone responds and he doesn't like it he goes crying to the mods.

I think Homer sees this thread to have a pop at SILH.
		
Click to expand...

I think that it's more the case that he will post almost any rubbish, without thinking too much about the content, just to get his post count up.  It's a compulsion for him but fortunately it seems that he has been limited to 20 posts a day (?).  At certain times of the evening, if you go into (say) Out of Bounds,  the last poster in many threads is HJS.


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Aug 2, 2020)

Pants said:



			I think that it's more the case that he will post almost any rubbish, without thinking too much about the content, just to get his post count up.  It's a compulsion for him but fortunately *it seems that he has been limited to 20 posts a day* (?).  At certain times of the evening, if you go into (say) Out of Bounds,  the last poster in many threads is HJS.
		
Click to expand...

Only for the last 5 years, not exactly news
But it does mean that the whole post count thing isn’t a thing any more.


----------



## pauljames87 (Aug 5, 2020)

Sorry to relight this classic but had a nice day out with old friend yest

His other half doesn't work ATM, he is working at Waitrose whilst he retrains to become a teacher. He really did start again. Lost IT job up London zero qualifications so been doing GCSE, a level now uni to become teacher . Mrs wants to be a teaching assistant

Anyways he on UC (replacing working tax credit) tops up his wages as a low earner around his uni work 

He was saying how last month got paid less because he did overtime so the amount adjusted and because he is taxed on his wages he took home less than if he hadn't done the shift. Wasn't complaining but he was like does make you think why bother?

The system as an idea is good. However it's just broken from top to bottom


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 5, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			Sorry to relight this classic but had a nice day out with old friend yest

His other half doesn't work ATM, he is working at Waitrose whilst he retrains to become a teacher. He really did start again. Lost IT job up London zero qualifications so been doing GCSE, a level now uni to become teacher . Mrs wants to be a teaching assistant

Anyways he on UC (replacing working tax credit) tops up his wages as a low earner around his uni work

He was saying how last month got paid less because he did overtime so the amount adjusted and because he is taxed on his wages he took home less than if he hadn't done the shift. Wasn't complaining but he was like does make you think why bother?

The system as an idea is good. However it's just broken from top to bottom
		
Click to expand...

I dont believe UC works that way, one of its principles was to make it worth while to work, they taper the reduction in your benefit so that it is always worth while working.

From the .GOV UC site:

*4. Universal Credit earnings taper rate*
Once you earn more than your work allowance your Universal Credit payments will be reduced at a steady rate. This is known as the Universal Credit earnings taper.
The Universal Credit earnings taper rate is currently 63%. This means that for every £1 you earn over your work allowance (if you are eligible for one) your Universal Credit will be reduced by 63p. this amount will be deducted automatically from your Universal Credit payment.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 5, 2020)

The system lags by a month.  I think it works this way.  Let's say I get £200 a month UC top up to my salary, and let's say in August I get some O/T and so end of August I take home an additional £100 from that O/T - and so £100 more than my July basic earnings take-home.

As @SR points out - that £100 will knock £63 off my end September UC payment - so my end September UC top-up will drop to £137.  But in September I don't get the O/T - I go back to my basic (July) earnings - and so at end of September my total income (work + UC) will be less that what I received in July because I worked O/T in August.  End October my UC top up will go back up to £200.

I think.  So I can't see how, if circumstances are normal, over a period of three months, the lad in the post lost out through working.  He most certainly would have had less earnings+UC the month after doing the overtime - but it should go back up.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 5, 2020)

SocketRocket said:



			I dont believe UC works that way, one of its principles was to make it worth while to work, they taper the reduction in your benefit so that it is always worth while working.

From the .GOV UC site:

*4. Universal Credit earnings taper rate*
Once you earn more than your work allowance your Universal Credit payments will be reduced at a steady rate. This is known as the Universal Credit earnings taper.
The Universal Credit earnings taper rate is currently 63%. This means that for every £1 you earn over your work allowance (if you are eligible for one) your Universal Credit will be reduced by 63p. this amount will be deducted automatically from your Universal Credit payment.
		
Click to expand...

The previous 3 topics (that being 4) are important!

For low earners, UC tops up to £512 (or £292 with housing support), then tapers. So OP's 'tops up' is correct (if he is earning <512/292) and still pays 37% of additional up to limit. One of the 'good' things about UC (at least over previous efforts) imo.

UC is meant to be a 'support' benefit, not simply a 'dole'!


----------



## pauljames87 (Aug 5, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			The system lags by a month.  I think it works this way.  Let's say I get £200 a month UC top up to my salary, and let's say in August I get some O/T and so end of August I take home an additional £100 from that O/T - and so £100 more than my July basic earnings take-home.

As @SR points out - that £100 will knock £63 off my end September UC payment - so my end September UC top-up will drop to £137.  But in September I don't get the O/T - I go back to my basic (July) earnings - and so at end of September my total income (work + UC) will be less that what I received in July because I worked O/T in August.  End October my UC top up will go back up to £200.

I think.  So I can't see how, if circumstances are normal, over a period of three months, the lad in the post lost out through working.  He most certainly would have had less earnings+UC the month after doing the overtime - but it should go back up.
		
Click to expand...

Maybe he will benefit next month and was saying the instant loss he will get 

He can't wait to get off it


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 5, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			Maybe he will benefit next month and was saying the instant loss he will get 

He can't wait to get off it
		
Click to expand...

Like most who have been forced onto it.


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 5, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Like most who have been forced onto it.
		
Click to expand...

Forced, what do you mean by that?


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Aug 5, 2020)

SocketRocket said:



			Forced, what do you mean by that?
		
Click to expand...

Assuming he's talking about his son losing his income and no savings to fall back on and so no sustainable income (as may are suffering) and forced to apply to UC


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 5, 2020)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Assuming he's talking about his son losing his income and no savings to fall back on and so no sustainable income (as may are suffering) and forced to apply to UC
		
Click to expand...

As many have had to do and as encouraged by the government. And ‘forced’ through circumstances of loss of income to seek support of the state made available and at slightly increased level. And I wasn’t actually. And remember you can claim UC with savings of up to £16k, so for many claiming UC is nothing to do with not having any savings but all to do with loss of income.


----------



## chrisd (Aug 6, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			As many have had to do and as encouraged by the government. And ‘forced’ through circumstances of loss of income to seek support of the state made available and at slightly increased level. And I wasn’t actually. And remember you can claim UC with savings of up to £16k, so for many claiming UC is nothing to do with not having any savings but all to do with loss of income.
		
Click to expand...

I seem to recall that many of the benefits from Government and Councils allowed the claimant to have some level of savings, this has been allowed going back over a number of years and the the level of savings gives a degree of security to the claimant given that they might be home owners with children and might need, and understandably are wise, to put money away to cover say, a new boiler or some emergency repairs to their house. It would seem to me a counter productive scheme that says as soon as you are unemployed you have to spend every penny you have before you can claim UC. I get the case you are trying to make but in no way can the Government can allow wages or redundancy owed to become "savings" as let's face it, someone getting a £16,000 redundancy payment would pop that money in the building society and be claiming UC straight away and that really isn't what the UC system is designed for.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 6, 2020)

chrisd said:



			I seem to recall that many of the benefits from Government and Councils allowed the claimant to have some level of savings, this has been allowed going back over a number of years and the the level of savings gives a degree of security to the claimant given that they might be home owners with children and might need, and understandably are wise, to put money away to cover say, a new boiler or some emergency repairs to their house. It would seem to me a counter productive scheme that says as soon as you are unemployed you have to spend every penny you have before you can claim UC. I get the case you are trying to make but in no way can the Government can allow wages or redundancy owed to become "savings" as let's face it, someone getting a £16,000 redundancy payment would pop that money in the building society and be claiming UC straight away and that really isn't what the UC system is designed for.
		
Click to expand...

This is all true and of course I get it.

It is perhaps an inequality in the system - allowing those with savings and registering for UC to benefit more than those with no savings, but who only have none because income was delayed until after registering.  And that has only ever been the point I raised.

Bear in mind that £6k is equivalent to about 6months UC for a couple.  I think we all expect (hope) anyone on UC to get a job within 6months.  In which case, for the person with £6k saving but without UC, £6k savings need not be totally depleted if the claimants live/spend as they would be expected to do on UC alone, and seek work as they are expected to do.


----------



## pauljames87 (Aug 6, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			This is all true and of course I get it.

It is perhaps an inequality in the system - allowing those with savings and registering for UC to benefit more than those with no savings, but who only have none because income was delayed until after registering.  And that has only ever been the point I raised.

Bear in mind that £6k is equivalent to about 6months UC for a couple.  I think we all expect (hope) anyone on UC to get a job within 6months.  In which case, for the person with £6k saving but without UC, £6k savings need not be totally depleted if the claimants live/spend as they would be expected to do on UC alone, and seek work as they are expected to do.
		
Click to expand...

Add to the fact the savings can be fiddled 

He could have given 6k to you to look after (say he had 12k then leaving with him 6k)


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 6, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			Add to the fact the savings can be fiddled

He could have given 6k to you to look after (say he had 12k then leaving with him 6k)
		
Click to expand...

Indeed - I am not aware of checks UC make on your bank or other savings accounts.  Or whether they depend upon the individual self-declaring savings that will reduce their UC or indeed disqualify them from claiming completely.  I suggest that not all claimants will do that.

And of course there is the other way around.  The UC recipient takes a loan (possibly but not necessarily from UC) to tide him over to their first UC payment - and that loan is to be cleared as soon as the delayed income arrives.  Unfortunately as soon as they declare that income to UC or UC become aware of it - their next month's UC is cut by 63p/£ of that income, and the income that was to be used to clear the debt mostly disappears.  And so they are caught in a debt vicious downward cycle.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Aug 6, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Indeed - I am not aware of checks UC make on your bank or other savings accounts.  Or whether they depend upon the individual self-declaring savings that will reduce their UC or indeed disqualify them from claiming completely.  I suggest that not all claimants will do that.
		
Click to expand...

I don’t believe they ask for proof under 6K.


----------



## pauljames87 (Aug 6, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Indeed - I am not aware of checks UC make on your bank or other savings accounts.  Or whether they depend upon the individual self-declaring savings that will reduce their UC or indeed disqualify them from claiming completely.  I suggest that not all claimants will do that.
		
Click to expand...

I know my FIL is going to be unemployed soon as my MIL has all her mum's money as they don't do banks (amount of time we found £10k in old notes in matress) anyways she moving the money to her sister to keep instead as he might have to claim UC and it's not even their money


----------



## chrisd (Aug 6, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			This is all true and of course I get it.

It is perhaps an inequality in the system - allowing those with savings and registering for UC to benefit more than those with no savings, but who only have none because income was delayed until after registering.  And that has only ever been the point I raised.

Bear in mind that £6k is equivalent to about 6months UC for a couple.  I think we all expect (hope) anyone on UC to get a job within 6months.  In which case, for the person with £6k saving but without UC, £6k savings need not be totally depleted if the claimants live/spend as they would be expected to do on UC alone, and seek work as they are expected to do.
		
Click to expand...

I dont agree.  The Government is keen that people save and with a UC scheme  whereby any savings must be spent before UC is paid, it would mean that low earners, perhaps home owners though, have nothing but the UC  to fall back on and the UC is supposed just to help with basic day to day living so, as I said earlier if their boiler breaks down they could have no means to pay for its repair or replacement,  as I understand UC is not given for these sort if eventualities.


----------



## Slab (Aug 6, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Indeed - I am not aware of checks UC make on your bank or other savings accounts.  Or whether they depend upon the individual self-declaring savings that will reduce their UC or indeed disqualify them from claiming completely.  I suggest that not all claimants will do that.

*And of course there is the other way around.  The UC recipient takes a loan (possibly but not necessarily from UC) to tide him over to their first UC payment - and that loan is to be cleared as soon as the delayed income arrives.  Unfortunately as soon as they declare that income to UC or UC become aware of it - their next month's UC is cut by 63p/£ of that income, and the income that was to be used to clear the debt mostly disappears.  And so they are caught in a debt vicious downward cycle*.
		
Click to expand...

Isn't debt declared as part of an application for UC?


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 6, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Indeed - I am not aware of checks UC make on your bank or other savings accounts.  Or whether they depend upon the individual self-declaring savings that will reduce their UC or indeed disqualify them from claiming completely.  I suggest that not all claimants will do that.

And of course there is the other way around.  The UC recipient takes a loan (possibly but not necessarily from UC) to tide him over to their first UC payment - and that loan is to be cleared as soon as the delayed income arrives.  Unfortunately as soon as they declare that income to UC or UC become aware of it - their next month's UC is cut by 63p/£ of that income, and the income that was to be used to clear the debt mostly disappears.  And so they are caught in a debt vicious downward cycle.
		
Click to expand...

There are those within the DWP, who with a valid reason, can and will check any account claimants have.


----------



## Wolf (Aug 6, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Indeed - I am not aware of checks UC make on your bank or other savings accounts.  Or whether they depend upon the individual self-declaring savings that will reduce their UC or indeed disqualify them from claiming completely.  I suggest that not all claimants will do that.

And of course there is the other way around.  *The UC recipient takes a loan (possibly but not necessarily from UC) to tide him over to their first UC payment - and that loan is to be cleared as soon as the delayed income arrives*.  Unfortunately as soon as they declare that income to UC or UC become aware of it - their next month's UC is cut by 63p/£ of that income, and the income that was to be used to clear the debt mostly disappears.  And so they are caught in a debt vicious downward cycle.
		
Click to expand...

Incorrect... As I've previously posted before in this thread the loan given called a budgeting loan isn't to be cleared as soon as the delayed income arrives. A percentage is taken off of each monthly benefit payment to clear the loan over a period of months. If the claimant gets a job in the mean time they set up a payment plan with DWP to clear the loan over an extended period. No difference in that respect to taking out a loan with any bank only difference being the loan is 0% interest for its duration until paid back.

If someone takes a loan out from a lender other than UC at that the time of a claim then that person is an idiot because without a job how are they expecting to pay it back anyway!



Slab said:



			Isn't debt declared as part of an application for UC?
		
Click to expand...

Nope no debts get cleared all debts still stand, however they will assist you getting help from someone like StepChange to manage your debts so that they don't consume you.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 6, 2020)

Anyone need debt advise, I cannot praise Step Change enough. They have helped with many of my cases.


----------



## Wolf (Aug 6, 2020)

Old Skier said:



			Anyone need debt advise, I cannot praise Step Change enough. They have helped with many of my cases.
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely brilliant organisation that give such good advice and assistance in managing debt, reducing debt and helping you budget for future.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 6, 2020)

chrisd said:



			I dont agree.  The Government is keen that people save and with a UC scheme  whereby any savings must be spent before UC is paid, it would mean that low earners, perhaps home owners though, have nothing but the UC  to fall back on and the UC is supposed just to help with basic day to day living so, as *I said earlier if their boiler breaks down they could have no means to pay for its repair or replacement*,  as I understand UC is not given for these sort if eventualities.
		
Click to expand...

Well - the government might wish a lot for us - but saving is not much of an option for a great many.  I previously posted a link to an article telling how 16m households have less than £100 at the and of any month - and that can't be saved as it is used to supplement their income for the next month. 

But the point is not about savings as such - I get that.  But why do we save?  We save mostly for a rainy day... and you actually made that point.  Those with <£6k savings can use that savings to supplement their UC if rainy days come - and can do so without it impacting the amount of their UC payment.  And that is fine.  Not arguing with that at all. 

Just saying that at the point of registering it would seem reasonable (and consistent with having savings) to allow income due but delayed to be considered savings at the point of registering - maybe a lesser amount than £6k - say £2k maximum.

BTW - on *this - *what do you think the poorer with little or no savings do in such an eventuality...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 6, 2020)

Wolf said:



			Incorrect... As I've previously posted before in this thread the loan given called a budgeting loan isn't to be cleared as soon as the delayed income arrives. A percentage is taken off of each monthly benefit payment to clear the loan over a period of months. If the claimant gets a job in the mean time they set up a payment plan with DWP to clear the loan over an extended period. No difference in that respect to taking out a loan with any bank only difference being the loan is 0% interest for its duration until paid back.

If someone takes a loan out from a lender other than UC at that the time of a claim then that person is an idiot because without a job how are they expecting to pay it back anyway!


Nope no debts get cleared all debts still stand, however they will assist you getting help from someone like StepChange to manage your debts so that they don't consume you.
		
Click to expand...

Not all loans are from UC - I was clear when I posted the comment that I wasn't simply talking about UC advances.  Not so much of an idiot if you don't understand what happens to delayed income after registering.

I find it rather sad how determined some on here are to make life as hard as possible for those who fall on hard times and have to rely upon UC.  Talk about tarring all with the same Murdoch brush...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 6, 2020)

Wolf said:



			Incorrect... As I've previously posted before in this thread the loan given called a budgeting loan isn't to be cleared as soon as the delayed income arrives. A percentage is taken off of each monthly benefit payment to clear the loan over a period of months. If the claimant gets a job in the mean time they set up a payment plan with DWP to clear the loan over an extended period. No difference in that respect to taking out a loan with any bank only difference being the loan is 0% interest for its duration until paid back.

If someone takes a loan out from a lender other than UC at that the time of a claim then that person is an idiot because without a job how are they expecting to pay it back anyway!


Nope no debts get cleared all debts still stand, however they will assist you getting help from someone like StepChange to manage your debts so that they don't consume you.
		
Click to expand...

All debts do indeed stand.  However such as StepChange help and advise individuals hugely on approaching those who are owed the money and how to agree a repayment plan that the individual can afford.


----------



## chrisd (Aug 6, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Well - the government might wish a lot for us - but saving is not much of an option for a great many.  I previously posted a link to an article telling how 16m households have less than £100 at the and of any month - and that can't be saved as it is used to supplement their income for the next month. 

But the point is not about savings as such - I get that.  But why do we save?  We save mostly for a rainy day... and you actually made that point.  Those with <£6k savings can use that savings to supplement their UC if rainy days come - and can do so without it impacting the amount of their UC payment.  And that is fine.  Not arguing with that at all. 

Just saying that at the point of registering it would seem reasonable (and consistent with having savings) to allow income due but delayed to be considered savings at the point of registering - maybe a lesser amount than £6k - say £2k maximum.

BTW - on *this - *what do you think the poorer with little or no savings do in such an eventuality...
		
Click to expand...

As has been previously posted, you cant expect a Government to have a system then change it to suit odd and differing situations.  Money owed for wages is not savings and in your son's case i doubt it would have ever ended up so even if paid promptly.

People with no savings, in a desperate situation can, as far as I understand , take a loan from the Government system.


----------



## Wolf (Aug 6, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Not all loans are from UC - I was clear when I posted the comment that I wasn't simply talking about UC advances.  Not so much of an idiot if you don't understand what happens to delayed income after registering.

I find it rather sad how determined some on here are to make life as hard as possible for those who fall on hard times and have to rely upon UC.  Talk about tarring all with the same Murdoch brush...
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps you didn't read my post or rather read what you want to see.

You didn't indeed say all loans come from UC, but I addressed that and I stand by the opinion someone is an idiot if they seek out a loan not from UC whilst having no job. How do you expect them to pay it back with no income, UC isn't an income for covering new loans its a safety net to stop you losing your home, put food on the table it's simply not to replace a standard of living or to cover new debts you choose to take out knowing you have no means of paying it back.

Also you find it sad how some are determined to tar all with same brush... That you only reading posts that don't support your view again or did you brush over the previous ones where I've pointed out holes in the system and the one where I said I've had to in past had to claim UC myself hence my thorough understanding of it. Doesn't suit your argument though to see someone thats been reliant on it to have a view that differs from your slant🤔

Plus whose tarring anyone, simply people disagree with you, doesn't mean they want to see people suffer and nobody has said they should at all but again doesn't suit your narrative to accept people have opinions different to yours. 

Also as for thr idiot comment, the reason I can stand by it is because had I been one of those taking a loan out elsewhere whilst on UC then I would also be one of those i class as being an idiot for putting myself in a position like that and it certainly would be my own fault and not the systems fault, like its not there fault if I had no savings.



SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			All debts do indeed stand.  However such as StepChange help and advise individuals hugely on approaching those who are owed the money and how to agree a repayment plan that the individual can afford.
		
Click to expand...

Is there an echo in here because that's exactly what I've said 🙄


----------



## Wolf (Aug 6, 2020)

chrisd said:



			As has been previously posted, you cant expect a Government to have a system then change it to suit odd and differing situations.  Money owed for wages is not savings and in your son's case i doubt it would have ever ended up so even if paid promptly.

*People with no savings, in a desperate situation can, as far as I understand , take a loan from the Government system*.
		
Click to expand...

Which is exactly what gets offered, but can you please stop talking sense 🤣


----------



## chrisd (Aug 6, 2020)

Wolf said:



			Which is exactly what gets offered, but can you please stop talking sense 🤣
		
Click to expand...

Sorry mate 😖😖


----------



## Hobbit (Aug 6, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Not all loans are from UC - I was clear when I posted the comment that I wasn't simply talking about UC advances.  Not so much of an idiot if you don't understand what happens to delayed income after registering.

I find it rather sad how determined some on here are to make life as hard as possible for those who fall on hard times and have to rely upon UC.  Talk about tarring all with the same Murdoch brush...
		
Click to expand...

UC is a flawed system in that it takes too long to pay out. And it is a corrupt system, and I deliberately use the word corrupt, in that its aim is to move people who are on a number of different benefits onto the 'unified' UC system, and in doing so the overall payment is reduced. Why, if someone has been deemed to be due a sum of money for benefit A, and for benefit B, and for benefit C with a total of X is that total reduced when they are moved onto UC? Its corrupt.

That said, the argument about what constitutes a saving and an income still seems to rumble on. And be honest Hugh, your son was highly unlikely to have saved a single penny from that income. But even that doesn't matter as it is income. Even if it had been paid just before he signed up for UC his UC payments would have reflected that recently received income.

Those that have savings up to a certain level aren't penalised for having savings, and good on the system for recognising their prudence. Their lifestyle, in that respect, is almost 'rewarded.' But why would someone be 'rewarded' for getting paid an income during receipt of UC? But they are 'rewarded.' For every £100 received as an income from elsewhere, only £63 is deducted from their UC payment.

Sorry Hugh but I see no logic in your argument. Your son received an income, not a deferred saving or any other spin you want to put on it. And if he received £1,000 as that income he got, in effect, £370 'extra' overall payment as his UC wasn't reduced by £1,000. He's £370 better off, not worse off as you seem to want to spin it.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 6, 2020)

Hobbit said:



			UC is a flawed system in that it takes too long to pay out. And it is a corrupt system, and I deliberately use the word corrupt, in that its aim is to move people who are on a number of different benefits onto the 'unified' UC system, and in doing so the overall payment is reduced. Why, if someone has been deemed to be due a sum of money for benefit A, and for benefit B, and for benefit C with a total of X is that total reduced when they are moved onto UC? Its corrupt.

That said, the argument about what constitutes a saving and an income still seems to rumble on. And be honest Hugh, your son was highly unlikely to have saved a single penny from that income. But even that doesn't matter as it is income. Even if it had been paid just before he signed up for UC his UC payments would have reflected that recently received income.

Those that have savings up to a certain level aren't penalised for having savings, and good on the system for recognising their prudence. Their lifestyle, in that respect, is almost 'rewarded.' But why would someone be 'rewarded' for getting paid an income during receipt of UC? But they are 'rewarded.' For every £100 received as an income from elsewhere, only £63 is deducted from their UC payment.

Sorry Hugh but I see no logic in your argument. Your son received an income, not a deferred saving or any other spin you want to put on it. And if he received £1,000 as that income he got, in effect, £370 'extra' overall payment as his UC wasn't reduced by £1,000. He's £370 better off, not worse off as you seem to want to spin it.
		
Click to expand...

I am not talking specifically about my son.  Savings is what you have built up out of earnings - yes?  If your earnings are delayed you can't add to your savings?   My point all along has been that in the current circumstances and the immediate shut-down on their work that happened to many - that rule specifically around delayed income could have been relaxed just the once.  And you suggest that an inability to save when you are earning very little is a 'lifestyle choice' - a lack of prudence - come on Bri...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 6, 2020)

Wolf said:



			Which is exactly what gets offered, but can you please stop talking sense 🤣
		
Click to expand...

Indeed - it makes sense - I know it does - you know it makes sense - to you, I and everyone on this forum it makes absolute sense - but we are not the person on a phone call with a UC assessor having had all our income disappear overnight - and might not take in what is said - if anything - about the impact of income due...

Clarity of thought is a marvellous thing and so easy to have when you are not under severe pressure and facing penury.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 6, 2020)

chrisd said:



			As has been previously posted, you cant expect a Government to have a system then change it to suit odd and differing situations.  Money owed for wages is not savings and in your son's case i doubt it would have ever ended up so even if paid promptly.

People with no savings, in a desperate situation can, as far as I understand , take a loan from the Government system.
		
Click to expand...

Yes you can.  Of course you can.  And the government has changed many systems over the last few months to help others.  So maybe a little tweak to the initial assessment wouldn't have been that difficult.  But of course it would be for the poorest - those becoming dependent upon the state.

As it happens my lad will be fine.  His situation has simply highlighted to me some the issues that many less fortunate than he - the poorest in our society - are likely to be facing.

But by all means, tell the many 'down' there - that it is only their lack of prudence, their fecklessness,  their inability to understand things properly - that it is up to them. Do that if you will.  I wont.


----------



## Wolf (Aug 6, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Indeed - it makes sense - I know it does - you know it makes sense - to you, I and everyone on this forum it makes absolute sense - *but we are not the person on a phone call with a UC assessor having had all our income disappear overnight -* and might not take in what is said - if anything - about the impact of income due...

Clarity of thought is a marvellous thing and so easy to have when you are not under severe pressure and facing penury.
		
Click to expand...

Yet again you haven't read what's actually been written only the bits you want to discuss..

I have been that person and totally understand what it feels like to lose my entire income overnight, I also had 6 kids to provide for as well. I very much know the pressures it causes and what the implications of having to rely on it are. But again you're avoiding discussing something with someone of actual experience of everything you're going on about and focusing on what you think should be allowed because of your sons situation.

As I've said I've been there and if I'd taken that loan I'd have been a fool, you assume because people disagree they don't understand. But I do understand I've been there, but it doesn't suit what you want to hear so you blindly avoid fact and continue in your one man crusade of ignorance to fact as you prefer the fiction you want it to be.

Even if your son had received his income at the start it would have counted as income and his UC payment would have been delayed, he hasn't lost out here its just balanced at a different time due to his delayed income. You refuse accept the truth though because you're only willing to see your side. Income is Income not savings to claim any other way would simply be benefit fraud.

As with every thread you create with your son as the focal point it always goes round in circles as you cannot and will not accept others views that don't agree with yours, instead you call them names or just repeat yourself.


----------



## Hobbit (Aug 6, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I am not talking specifically about my son.  Savings is what you have built up out of earnings - yes?  If your earnings are delayed you can't add to your savings?   My point all along has been that in the current circumstances and the immediate shut-down on their work that happened to many - that rule specifically around delayed income could have been relaxed just the once.  And you suggest that an inability to save when you are earning very little is a 'lifestyle choice' - a lack of prudence - come on Bri...
		
Click to expand...

If you're not talking about your son's case and his late payment of earnings, just what have you been talking about? He has been the example you've used for rule changes/relaxing of rules all the way through this debate. 

Where did I say it was a lifestyle choice? And where did I say he lacked prudence? His inability to save is, based on your previous posts, that he works in an industry that in the lower echelons doesn't pay well. And as for savings, bearing in mind he might have a tax bill to reconcile, I would hope he has been saving. If he was earning, for example, £1,000 and spending £1,000 where are his NI and Income Tax pot for payment later.

And why relax the rules? As was pointed out by LT, non-payment of what he was due was almost certainly down to those companies choosing not to pay him. Other bills and salaries will have been paid. But at the end of the day he received the UC he was due, and he had access to bridging loans with a generous deferred payment schedule.


----------



## chrisd (Aug 6, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Yes you can.  Of course you can.  And the government has changed many systems over the last few months to help others.  So maybe a little tweak to the initial assessment wouldn't have been that difficult.  But of course it would be for the poorest - those becoming dependent upon the state.

As it happens my lad will be fine.  His situation has simply highlighted to me some the issues that many less fortunate than he - the poorest in our society - are likely to be facing.

But by all means, tell the many 'down' there - that it is only their lack of prudence, their fecklessness,  their inability to understand things properly - that it is up to them. Do that if you will.  I wont.
		
Click to expand...

You really dont get it, and the last sentence is an insult along the lines of your Brexit rubbish - I'm not prepared to try and discuss with you when all you do is insult people who disagree with you 

I'm stunned that the mods dont stop this baiting/trolling


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 6, 2020)

Wolf said:



			Yet again you haven't read what's actually been written only the bits you want to discuss..

I have been that person and totally understand what it feels like to lose my entire income overnight, I also had 6 kids to provide for as well. I very much know the pressures it causes and what the implications of having to rely on it are. But again you're avoiding discussing something with someone of actual experience of everything you're going on about and focusing on what you think should be allowed because of your sons situation.

As I've said I've been there and if I'd taken that loan I'd have been a fool, you assume because people disagree they don't understand. But I do understand I've been there, but it doesn't suit what you want to hear so you blindly avoid fact and continue in your one man crusade of ignorance to fact as you prefer the fiction you want it to be.

Even if your son had received his income at the start it would have counted as income and his UC payment would have been delayed, he hasn't lost out here its just balanced at a different time due to his delayed income. You refuse accept the truth though because you're only willing to see your side. Income is Income not savings to claim any other way would simply be benefit fraud.

As with every thread you create with your son as the focal point it always goes round in circles as you cannot and will not accept others views that don't agree with yours, instead you call them names or just repeat yourself.
		
Click to expand...

Apologies - I misunderstood.  I do understand what you say about income.  

My point has only ever been that income due counting as income no matter when it came in *could have been waived in the current circumstances.*  Or in the current circumstances the government *could *have allowed one months income due up to an amount of say £2k to be waived in the initial assessment.  I know that the system doesn't allow for that at the moment.  I just thought it would be something the government _could _have done to help those - who through no fault of their own - were forced to register for UC.

But as I have also said.  My lad will be OK.  But his experience has only highlighted to me the issues that claimants have to deal with.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 6, 2020)

chrisd said:



			You really dont get it, and the last sentence is an insult along the lines of your Brexit rubbish - I'm not prepared to try and discuss with you when all you do is insult people who disagree with you

I'm stunned that the mods dont stop this baiting/trolling
		
Click to expand...

I'm afraid you are just as culpable!

While not defending SILH's pov (and I don't believe he's looking for defence, nor, particularly, changes to 'the system') I do believe there's a few 'flaws' in the system that _could_ be addressed. And late payment of SILH Jr's pay/invoice is likely one of them. To me, it seems 'fair' for some sort of review to be conducted about such late payments. IMO...If this was 'standard', then 'budgeting' should be Jr's responsibility. However, if payment regular and was normally prompt - and there delay was because the 'debtor's' planning for their own cashflow for the pandemic, I believe the due payment should be treated as if it was it had been paid on time.

I'm pretty certain there are/will be loads of subtle issues such as this, and, i believe, there should be some sort of (independent) Appeals authority that rules on 'fairness' for such cases. Those (bludgers imo) who abuse the system should be named/shamed too, but those who, for whatever circumstances, are 'caught by circumstances', need, imo, help, not criticism.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 6, 2020)

chrisd said:



			You really dont get it, and the last sentence is an insult along the lines of your Brexit rubbish - I'm not prepared to try and discuss with you when all you do is insult people who disagree with you

I'm stunned that the mods dont stop this baiting/trolling
		
Click to expand...

Oh I get it fine.  Thing is - if you read some comments from a certain viewpoint they can unfortunately seem that way. And that's just how it is. BTW - Brexit is done - it's over.


----------



## Hobbit (Aug 6, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Apologies - I misunderstood.  I do understand what you say about income. 

My point has only ever been that income due counting as income no matter when it came in *could have been waived in the current circumstances.*  Or in the current circumstances the government *could *have allowed one months income due up to an amount of say £2k to be waived in the initial assessment.  I know that the system doesn't allow for that at the moment.  I just thought it would be something the government _could _have done to help those - who through no fault of their own - were forced to register for UC.

But as I have also said.  My lad will be OK.  But his experience has only highlighted to me the issues that claimants have to deal with.
		
Click to expand...

I just don't agree with waived in the current circumstances. Lockdown; the number of people I've been in conversation with who have said they actually didn't spend as much as they normally do because they were stuck inside the majority of the time. They weren't putting fuel in their car, they weren't going to restaurants or pubs, they were making the meals more cheaply because they were buying decent produce rather than buying convenience foods and ready meals.

How much do you think the govt has spent through the crisis on furlough etc? How much Treasury debt have you seen the media tell us the govt has created to try and get the country through the crisis? How much of a nanny state do you want? 

And just because people don't agree with your point on this doesn't make them nasty people. That point could actually be flipped and you could be asked why you want to turn UC into a favourable lifestyle choice...


----------



## chrisd (Aug 6, 2020)

Foxholer said:



			I'm afraid you are just as culpable!

While not defending SILH's pov (and I don't believe he's looking for defence, nor, particularly, changes to 'the system') I do believe there's a few 'flaws' in the system that _could_ be addressed. And late payment of SILH Jr's pay/invoice is likely one of them. To me, it seems 'fair' for some sort of review to be conducted about such late payments. IMO...If this was 'standard', then 'budgeting' should be Jr's responsibility. However, if payment regular and was normally prompt - and there delay was because the 'debtor's' planning for their own cashflow for the pandemic, I believe the due payment should be treated as if it was it had been paid on time.

I'm pretty certain there are/will be loads of subtle issues such as this, and, i believe, there should be some sort of (independent) Appeals authority that rules on 'fairness' for such cases. Those (bludgers imo) who abuse the system should be named/shamed too, but those who, for whatever circumstances, are 'caught by circumstances', need, imo, help, not criticism.
		
Click to expand...

Total rubbish


----------



## chrisd (Aug 6, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Oh I get it fine.  Thing is - if you read some comments from a certain viewpoint they can unfortunately seem that way. And that's just how it is. BTW - Brexit is done - it's over.
		
Click to expand...

And so is my trying to reason with you


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 6, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Apologies - I misunderstood.  I do understand what you say about income. 

My point has only ever been that income due counting as income no matter when it came in *could have been waived in the current circumstances.*  Or in the current circumstances the government *could *have allowed one months income due up to an amount of say £2k to be waived in the initial assessment.  I know that the system doesn't allow for that at the moment.  I just thought it would be something the government _could _have done to help those - who through no fault of their own - were forced to register for UC.

But as I have also said.  My lad will be OK.  But his experience has only highlighted to me the issues that claimants have to deal with.
		
Click to expand...

If your waive one rule then surely it’s only fair that you remove another rule, and then another, at what point do you stop and who gives the authority. It’s like pensions and DOB, some are lucky some are not.


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 6, 2020)

Foxholer said:



			I'm afraid you are just as culpable!

While not defending SILH's pov (and I don't believe he's looking for defence, nor, particularly, changes to 'the system') I do believe there's a few 'flaws' in the system that _could_ be addressed. And late payment of SILH Jr's pay/invoice is likely one of them. To me, it seems 'fair' for some sort of review to be conducted about such late payments. IMO...If this was 'standard', then 'budgeting' should be Jr's responsibility. However, if payment regular and was normally prompt - and there delay was because the 'debtor's' planning for their own cashflow for the pandemic, I believe the due payment should be treated as if it was it had been paid on time.

I'm pretty certain there are/will be loads of subtle issues such as this, and, i believe, there should be some sort of (independent) Appeals authority that rules on 'fairness' for such cases. Those (bludgers imo) who abuse the system should be named/shamed too, but those who, for whatever circumstances, are 'caught by circumstances', need, imo, help, not criticism.
		
Click to expand...

Twaddle!


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 6, 2020)

SocketRocket said:



			Twaddle!
		
Click to expand...

Opinions, by definition, cannot be 'twaddle'! Convince that my opinion is wrong and I might well change it!
Erroneous assertions (of supposed 'facts'), on the other hand, CAN be so described!


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 6, 2020)

Foxholer said:



			Opinions, by definition, cannot be 'twaddle'! Convince that my opinion is wrong and I might well change it!
Erroneous assertions (of supposed 'facts'), on the other hand, CAN be so described!
		
Click to expand...

Your alter-ego wont allow you to accept it's wrong.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 7, 2020)

SocketRocket said:



			Your alter-ego wont allow you to accept it's wrong.
		
Click to expand...

Well, that's really convincing....NOT!


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 7, 2020)

Foxholer said:



			Well, that's really convincing....NOT!
		
Click to expand...

Told you so 😄


----------



## drdel (Aug 7, 2020)

UC is a method designed for  the vast majority. There will be flaws, as there always is.

IMO the tread is going around in circles.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Aug 7, 2020)

Foxholer said:



*Opinions, by definition, cannot be 'twaddle'!* Convince that my opinion is wrong and I might well change it!
Erroneous assertions (of supposed 'facts'), on the other hand, CAN be so described!
		
Click to expand...

I disagree with the bit in bold. Some people have the opinion that the world is flat, which is an opinion that is clearly twaddle.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 7, 2020)

Hobbit said:



			I just don't agree with waived in the current circumstances. Lockdown; the number of people I've been in conversation with who have said they actually didn't spend as much as they normally do because they were stuck inside the majority of the time. They weren't putting fuel in their car, they weren't going to restaurants or pubs, they were making the meals more cheaply because they were buying decent produce rather than buying convenience foods and ready meals.

How much do you think the govt has spent through the crisis on furlough etc? How much Treasury debt have you seen the media tell us the govt has created to try and get the country through the crisis? How much of a nanny state do you want?

And just because people don't agree with your point on this doesn't make them nasty people. That point could actually be flipped and you could be asked why *you want to turn UC into a favourable lifestyle choice.*..
		
Click to expand...

But Bri I _don't_.  Surely by now I have made that 100% clear


----------



## Hobbit (Aug 7, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			But Bri I _don't_.  Surely by now I have made that 100% clear 

Click to expand...

I said "you could be asked..." The point I was trying to make was you appear to think that people who disagree with you are nasty tight fisted Tories, and that could be flipped to asking why you want to make UC so comfortable. Neither opinion is necessarily right.


----------

