Had an interesting phone call from the manager of the local pensions service HV section. She says large numbers of PC claimants are withdrawing their claims after its confirmed on HV how much savings credit they'll be entitled to. Not so much a problem where CTB only but where clients are on HB/CTB they're saying why bother claiming £10-20 if 85% of it is clawed back, especially after they've already got the extra in HB/CTB through the additions to the applicable amount.

The manager reports all of her home visitors are coming across clients who think its too much hassle supplying income and savings details for a couple of quid a week. Can't blame em really.

Where the savings credit is only going to be £1 or £2 per week, I can understand that claimants are'nt that interested in claiming.

However, I'm a little confused over the bit about 85% clawback of Savings credit where HB is concerned. Unusually, it was never the intention to give with one hand and take away with the other - therefore the applicable amount in HB is raised from £102.10 to £116.90 (14.80) for a single pensioner to allow for this where SC is present: this effectively means that SC is disregarded.

If the Pensioners in your area are under the impression that they would lose a large proportion of their SC to HB, then it would appear that they are being wrongly (and badly) advised: possibly by some of the Pension Service HV's ?

I think I need to explain it a bit better than I did.

The claimants our local Pensions Service are talking about are pensioners who have already had the benefit of the extra 14.79 and 19.20 in their HB/CTB awards. So, they are already benefiting from this when seen by the Pensions Service. That done, any ongoing award of Savings Credit will be taken into accountin full.

Typical example as described to me: Pensions Service visitor is asked how much savings credit they can expect and is told £10 but claimant also wants to know how that affects HB/CTB. Visitor informs that 85% will be lost in HB/CTB. Claimant says forget it I'm not running round like a headless chicken putting my income and savings details together for £1.50 a week.

The kickback is why apply for SC with the hassles that go with it if all its going to give me is a couple of quid when I've just had a nice rise in my HB/CTB and I didn't have to do a thing thank you very much.

Pensions Service locally are doing all they can to promote take-up, emphasizing the passport effects, taking SC now to take advantage of automatic updates later on, even delaying claims up to October.

I can see the logic and depending on their income and savings there does come a point when they do not benefit to any great extent: someone with £105 per week income and savings of £10000 would end up paying some £4.24pw on rent of £50pw, and 1.30pw toward CT of £900pa (after 25% discount) out of SC of £10.43pw.

I would hope that Pensions Service would be looking for those single pensioners who are entitled to Severe disability premium, and couples who are entitled to SDP x2 and Carers premium x2, but have lost out for years in some cases cos no one ever told them these benefits even existed.

The PS in this part of the world ar now doing a fair number of AA claims as well - I did hear one one VO who was so incensed at a claim he'd done being turned down, he helped the client make a successful appeal....dedication over and above the call of duty I'd call that............

Hi Folks

Solution to savings credit claims and HB / CT claw back?

Allow the full £14.79 or £19.20 to be included in the HB / CT calculation now in full, wait until september then fully backdate the savings credit claim until october 2003, result?

Full savings credit due backdated one year and paid in a lump sum, with no overpayment of HB or CT as any arrears is treated as capital and therefore ignored.

A number of points arise from the discussion so far:

1)It's unfortunate that some claimants do not see the connection between the HB/CTB uprating at 65 and Savings Credit, and that the former would probably never have happened without the latter.

2)I reckon that a fairly significant amount of the overall benefits underclaim is due to the "its hardly worth it" approach, which the Pensions Service should be encouraged to counter. £3.00pw could well add up to 50% of some peoples fuel bills.

3) The form for Pension Credit is a one off, and the lack of a benefit period and the AIP mean that the hassle is minimal.

4) Some claimants will not want to divulge income and capital data, but this was a problem before PC. Government and independanrt surveys confirm this has been a barrier to claiming for many years (although the irony with Savings Credit is that disclosure can lead to more money!).

5) Tactical claiming of PC during the take on period sounds tempting, but the usual problems arise: what if I am hit by a bus and lose the forgone benefit? What if I fail to claim at the end of September? Also, not everyboby can expect a tangible/worthwhile reward for delaying a claim. It depends on the relationship between the claimants HB/CTB applicable amount and their income (with and without Savings Credit). Those of you who have seen the "famous" DWP letter on this (featuring Vanessa, Virginia and Edith!)will know what I mean. Finally, in order to benefit from the delayed PC claim, there must be a HB/CTB claim already in place (but note that HB/CTB also has its own take on period between Oct 03 and Oct 04).

Pip pip!

I must say we are doing a Pension Credit campaign at the moment and I have visited hundreds of people that qualify, I have not had that many where it is not worth claiming, the majority of people will be better off claiming. Yes it does depend on their income, but from experience it has been good for most.

Since this was posted, we've had a couple of interesting conversations with the local PS - seems their VO's are reporting the same thing ...

In addition, the figures they have been given show that there were 1.7 million MIG claimants who were passported over to PC in October 2003 - there are now 2.1 million claimants receiving PC - take one from t'other and it seems they've only attracted 400,000 new claimants, which seems to be a long long way off target.

Reasons for this -
possibly some think (wrongly) that any increase in Guaranteed PC will affect their HB/CTB entitlement - no doubt based on years of experience of benfits being given in one hand and taken out of the other....
A reluctance to disclose all their personal details - we have had a small number of undisclosed bank accounts come to light via a PC claim, where a claimant had forgotten what details they had given us - one for about £29000.

However, it does explain why the PS are actively encouraging "partnership" working to try and find all these shy claimants, even to the extent of letting us verify details for them,........!

Its not the Gaurantee Credit thats the problem according to the PS but where the claimant only qualifies for SC. If GC is paid then full HB and CTB follows. I don't think the problem extends to CTB recipients where only 20% clawback.

Local PS are saying its not so much a reluctance to disclose their details thats the problem, they're ready and willing to do it. Its more that on being informed that their award of £10 SC will result in £8.50 being clawed back they're showing the PS the door because they don't see 1.50 gain as worth the claim.

I'm not sure I can agree with Steve when he says the PS should be countering this. How, If a client doesn't want to claim for the reason that s/he thinks the overall material gain isn't worth the trouble what can you do. Send the boys round. Sign the form or the cat gets it. Ironic and funny twist that the old reasons for failure to claim(stigma, form filling, etc) dont apply here. PS are sat on the settee extolling the advantages of PC, pens poised and elbows oiled but having to answer truthfully that any award of SC will result in withdrawal of HB/CTB and the client is saying ta muchly for coming but no thanks.

Interesting to see how the DWP PR gurus address this one.

I take your point of course about choice, but if large numbers of pensioners reject benefit that is only a signature away, it would not take the politicians long to suggest that all is well financially for pensioners...