Universal Credit

[PJ87]

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.

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]

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)

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]

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.

I don’t believe they ask for proof under 6K.

 

[PJ87]

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.

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]

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.

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]

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.

Isn't debt declared as part of an application for UC?

 

[Old Skier]

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.

There are those within the DWP, who with a valid reason, can and will check any account claimants have.

 

[Wolf]

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.

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!

Isn't debt declared as part of an application for UC?

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]

Anyone need debt advise, I cannot praise Step Change enough. They have helped with many of my cases.

 

[Wolf]

Anyone need debt advise, I cannot praise Step Change enough. They have helped with many of my cases.

Absolutely brilliant organisation that give such good advice and assistance in managing debt, reducing debt and helping you budget for future.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

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.

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]

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.

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]

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.

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]

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...

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]

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...

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.

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.

Is there an echo in here because that's exactly what I've said ?

 

[Wolf]

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.

Which is exactly what gets offered, but can you please stop talking sense ?

 

[chrisd]

Which is exactly what gets offered, but can you please stop talking sense ?

Sorry mate ??

 

[Hobbit]

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...

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]

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.

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]

Which is exactly what gets offered, but can you please stop talking sense ?

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.