× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Universal credit administration  →  Thread

UC Pathfinders - who’s included..

Jon Blackwell
forum member

Programmer - Lisson Grove Benefits Program, Brighton

Send message

Total Posts: 501

Joined: 18 June 2010

The UC(TP) Regs 2013 set out who can claim UC in the Pathfinder areas(*) from 29 April 2013.

As far as I can see, amongs other things, UC claimants will (at the point of claim)..

Be single, aged 18-60.5 years;
Have no dependent children;
Not be on (nor awaiting a decision about) JSA,ESA,IS,HB,WTC,CTC,DLA,PIP,IB,SDA;
Not have limited capability for work;
Not be pregnant not recently pregnant;
Not be a carer;
Not be homeless;
Not be in supported accomation;
Not be an owner-occupier;
Not be (expecting to be) self-employed.
Not be in education or training.
Not have savings over £6,000.

But they must already have a bank/building soc/PO account.

It’s a bit hard to see how this is going to be a useful test of the ‘live’ system.


(*) the specific postcodes (within Wigan, Warrington, Oldham and Tameside) are yet to be defined.

Ariadne
forum member

Social policy coordinator, CAB, Basingstoke

Send message

Total Posts: 504

Joined: 16 June 2010

This is surely intended to see if the system can cope with the simplest cases before going on to look at anybody more complicated. I believe that on go live it will iniitally be only new jobseekers and the more complex cases will gradually be rolled over.

After all if it falls down on this group it says a lot more than if it fails on some of the really complex csaes we all know about.

chris smith
forum member

HB Help, Sussex

Send message

Total Posts: 82

Joined: 18 June 2010

Looks very limited indeed.  Just dipping their toe in the water

Hilary Reynolds, DWP Director for the Universal Credit Programme has written to councils as follows.

For the majority of local authorities, the impact of UC during the financial year 2013/14 will be limited. We are planning to introduce UC in phases, beginning from April 2013 in the Greater Manchester Pathfinder. Initially, UC will replace new claims from single jobseekers of working age in certain defined postcode areas.

From October 2013 we plan to extend the service to include jobseekers with children, couples and owner-occupiers, gradually expanding the service to locations across Great Britain and making it available to the full range of eligible working age claimants.”

chris smith
forum member

HB Help, Sussex

Send message

Total Posts: 82

Joined: 18 June 2010

Here is my latest analysis

From 29th April 2013 universal credit is due to start in Tameside, Oldham, Wigan and Warrington.  The actual areas will be a number of postcodes within those council areas, not necessary corresponding to the council borders.

Not all claimants in these areas will claim universal credit.  To be able to claim people must meet the following conditions:

•  They must be single  
•  They must be aged between 18 and 60 years and six months
•  They must be a British citizen who has lived in the country for the last two years and has not left for more than four continuous weeks;
•  They must not be already on means tested JSA, means tested employment and support allowance, income support, housing benefit, child tax credit, working tax credit:
•  They must not now be entitled any of those benefits or to contributory JSA or contributory ESA or waiting for a claim to be decided for any of the benefits in these two paragraphs or still have a live appeal about any of these benefits.
•  They must not be pregnant,
•  They must accept that they are fit for work;
•  They must not have had a claim for JSA or which finished in the previous 2 weeks;
•  They must not have had a claim for ESA which finished in the last two weeks unless it was decided that they were fit for work;
•  They must not be likely to earn more than £330 in the next month if they are aged 25 or over( £270 if under)
•  They must not have savings of more than £6,000`
•  They must not be homeless within the meaning of section 175 of the Housing Act 1996;
•  They must not be in exempt accommodation;
•  They must not be an owner occupier or shared owner;
•  They must not be responsible for a child
•  They must not be responsible for providing care to someone who needs it (unless this is for a part time job or volunteering activity)
•  They must not be about to take up self-employment;
•  They must not be in education or training and must be unlikely to take up this in the next month;
•  They must not have a formal appointee;
•  They must have a national insurance number
•  They must have a bank, building society or post office account.

However if they form a couple later after claiming they can claim universal credit together.

So who does that leave?

It looks like “standard” single people who become unemployed and are looking for a job, but are not entitled to contributory job seekers allowance.

Paul Treloar
forum member

Head of Policy, LASA

Send message

Total Posts: 842

Joined: 6 January 2011

It could include single low-income part-time workers as well, couldn’t it?

Jon Blackwell
forum member

Programmer - Lisson Grove Benefits Program, Brighton

Send message

Total Posts: 501

Joined: 18 June 2010

Paul Treloar - 19 December 2012 02:56 PM

It could include single low-income part-time workers as well, couldn’t it?

That’s correct, Paul (where they’re not already on JSA.) The monthly income limits on (anticipated) income are set at roughly the point where JSA(IB) cuts out. Effectively, they’re attempting to replace new claims for JSA(IB)+HB for this group.

My concern is that when the pathfinders go well (*), the DWP will use the pathfinder results to unwarrantedly inform the much wider rollout. Across the pathfinder, they’re expecting to take on about 1,500 UC claimants / month. The gives about 2000-2500 claim-years in total to explore changes-in-circumstances (which, given the intake case-mix,  is a tiny number.)  In particular, you can easily imagine DWP drawing the wrong conclusions about vulnerable claimants.

 

(*) If they don’t go well with these restrictions (and the massively increased clerical resource and local expertise) then what hope is there for ‘real world’ scales and case-mix?

[ Edited: 19 Dec 2012 at 04:51 pm by Jon Blackwell ]