Forum Home → Discussion → Universal credit migration → Thread
Does a partner moving in have to trigger a claim for UC?
We’ve got a client at the moment who was living alone and happily claiming ir-ESA (in the support group), HB and PIP (Standard Daily Living). They then had a partner move in with them (partner wasn’t working and didn’t bring any children with them) and the client appears to have been told to claim UC instead of ESA as a result of the partner moving. Now, the SDP gateway doesn’t apply once the partner moved in as they don’t satisfy the conditions anymore but I’m not convinced that that is actually relevant because I don’t see that a partner moving in would be a trigger to migrating to UC anyway?
They didn’t need to claim any new benefits now they were a couple (no Tax Credits to worry about and the HB was already in the ESA claimants name) so surely it should have been a simple change of circumstances for the ESA to now be paid at the couple rate rather than the single persons rate?
Am I right? Or have I got completely the wrong end of the stick? If I’m right can anyone point me towards something (regulations, caselaw, etc) that I can hang my hat on?
I would say it’s simply a change of circs for the ESA claim - getting a couple’s applicable amount, rather than a single person’s applicable amount, as part of the ESA calculation. I would say that you don’t need any case law. An analogous situation would be if a single claimant on ESA got PIP daily living and became entitled to the SDP - it’s a simple change of circs, they should get the SDP as no new claim for benefit needs to be made.
You are right, it is a simple change of circumstances for ESA - there isn’t any legislation specifically, other than the usual regulations governing supersession for ESA. No new claim is required, therefore the issue of whether or not there is a “gateway” is irrelevant. If someone actually goes and claims UC, there is nothing to prevent that claim being made in the circumstances you describe and the UC claim will end ESA(IR), as well as HB (unless specified accommodation, etc)
If the DWP were the ones who advised them to claim UC, they can make a claim for compensation. See Q133-Q142 here.
Thank you Alex and Brian for your speedy response!
@Charles: Yes that’s the next avenue we’re going to explore as it looks like it may well have been the DWP that advised the claim for UC. It’s possible that they’re actually better off on UC so this could be relatively academic but something that I’ll be getting the adviser that’s working with them to explore more.
If the DWP were the ones who advised them to claim UC, they can make a claim for compensation. See Q133-Q142 here.
Do you know of any cases where compensation has been granted, and the process taken to get there?
I saw quite a few of these cases at CAB while UC was being rolled out, as JCP staff often aggressively pushed for UC. However, this generally came in the form of oral directions.
SARs and pray the staff accurately records their conversations, even if they were in person at JCP? Could potentially create a mountain of work for DWP.
If the DWP were the ones who advised them to claim UC, they can make a claim for compensation. See Q133-Q142 here.
Having looked into it a bit more with the client it doesn’t appear it was the DWP that advised the claim for UC so nothing doing there. In any event they appear to have been slightly better off going onto UC (due to being able to get the Carer Element even before Carers Allowance) when they did so whoever told them to claim UC didn’t do them any harm.
But thanks to those replying for confirming the general principle!
Hi
Sorry to jump on your post but I have a very similar case and was wondering if anyone can help with a benefit cap query?
When someone has rent liability on two homes (main residence - UC and temporary residence - HB) when calculating whether someone is affected by the benefit cap, will the DWP add the whole UC award and the housing benefit together?
Thank you
No:
- If the claimant is on UC, there is never an HB benefit cap
- HB itself does not count towards the UC benefit cap
This ensures that the claimant will only be capped “naturally” as it were on the UC side
Thanks!!!
I have a similar situation to that in post #1, the only differences being the partner planning to move in (not moved in yet) has already claimed UC, and they are going to move in together to a new property together when they find suitable accommodation. I have no info about what UC elements he brings to the table but there are no children on either side. She claims ESA and PIP.
Assuming there’s no break in the rent liability, could he in theory withdraw his UC claim, and his partner do a change of address form for HB and an ESA3 for adding him to her ESA claim, to avoid UC? Or has his UC claim prevented him from being able to be included on her ESA claim?
Thanks in advance
He could withdraw his UC claim before moving in, and then they could stay on legacy benefits.
I would be careful though: the ADM was amended recently, and now says that a request to close a UC claim will only take affect from after the END of the current AP. Previously, it said that the closure would take effect from the START of the current AP. (I have a FOI request in progress to try and find out on what basis this change was made.)
Interesting info!
Thank you