Forum Home → Discussion → Universal credit migration → Thread
UC/ESA
Saving Credit PC claim contingent on the age that they reached qualifying age of course also.
Yep, but o/p says partner is 67.
Yes but both partners need to have reached qualifying age for PC to make a new PC savings credit claim, not just one of them.
Yes but both partners need to have reached qualifying age for PC to make a new PC savings credit claim, not just one of them.
Slap head, of course it’s a new claim.
Sorry but jumping on the thread here! Client claimed UC during ESA MR and came to us to appeal. All a bit murky as client had no information with him. We lodged the appeal but he has now seen his support worker who has called UC to state that he is unable to work with the client submitting fit notes.
My question - will the change of circumstances initiate a new assessment for LCW/LCWRA? If the appeal is successful can this supersede any new decision under the UC reassessment (if that happens as a result of the change of circs)?
We saw the client while he was already on UC so if his appeal is successful will he need a fit note for the appeal period as you do for getting ESA pending an appeal? Surely when he claimed UC he would have said that he was appealing the ESA so would he be treated as having LCW or LCWRA automatically if the appeal is successful?
Confused!!
As the claimant has now made a UC claim in a Full Service area then is it correct to say that he cannot now return to any of the legacy benefits regardless of the outcome of his ESA appeal on the WCA?
It’s arguable that he could withdraw the UC claim before it is decided: I think this would that he effectively never claimed UC. Once the UC claim is decided then in theory yes, that’s it for legacy benefits. ......
Hi HB Anorak - I have a similar case (failed WCA and has been incorrectly advised to start a new claim for UC in the last few days as this is the only way to get help with rent(!)) and further to discussion with colleagues in relation to this thread I wanted to clarify what you mean by “decided” in relation to a new UC claim.
There is a risk: they lose the MR/appeal and have missed out on UC in the meantime. But its their choice and they have the right.
I’m not sure about this - if they lose the MR then as soon as they lodge the appeal ESA would be reinstated from when it stopped wouldn’t it and would be paid up to the outcome of the appeal. If they they lost they would need to claim UC but I don’t think would have lost out in the interim?
Hi all, just to follow on from last post about getting some help via UC to cover rent during the MR period and with reference to Daphne’s post: It seems to me that unless the MR takes more than a month and a week, then claiming UC wont actually help as that’s as long as you’d have to wait (at least!!) for UC to be paid.
I believe Daphne is right in that, once the MR period is over, ESA starts being paid again INCLUDING arrears of ESA to cover the MR period. There seems little advantage ever in claiming UC in this sort of circs.
With the added risk that a claimant may lose entitlement to premiums if they do claim UC, it seems better to avoid claiming UC, chase an early decision on the MR (not necessarily easy I suspect), and await reinstatement of ESA at the basic rate pending the appeal.
Re Pension Credit Savings Credit; just to clarify that both of a couple have to have reached 65 by 6 April 2016 in order to make a new claim for PC including the savings credit. see CPAG p 151.There must be 1000’s of pensioners missing out on a few pounds worth of savings credit who have been led to believe they have to much income for PC.
I have a similar case and to be fair, I am still trying to get a straight answer out of both the client and the DWP (client has lost his paperwork).
What appears to have occurred is that my client was found fit for work and successfully appealed last year and found to have a LCW. Unfortunately as his LCW commenced after April 17 the UC he is now on will not attract the additional element he would have got had he stayed on ESA.
Am I right in thinking that if he had a LCW prior to the decision he appealed (i.e. before April 17), then the LCW would then be continuous and any subsequent UC claim would also be classed as continuous and include the LCW element?
Also re rent, although they have lost their passporting benefit for HB their income has gone down and not up. Their entitlement to HB continues but based on income not passporting benefit. If they provide their bank statements and a copy of the ESA refusal and their MR, our borough will re-instate their HB which is anyway only suspended.
The additional danger of claiming UC is that all entitlement to HB stops and if there is a gap between ESA ending and rent entitlement via UC starting, the client will have to argue that HB should fill it although he or she no longer has a HB claim. I know that should be possible but it’s an extra hassle and won’t appear immediately to the client
There is a risk: they lose the MR/appeal and have missed out on UC in the meantime. But its their choice and they have the right.
I’m not sure about this - if they lose the MR then as soon as they lodge the appeal ESA would be reinstated from when it stopped wouldn’t it and would be paid up to the outcome of the appeal. If they they lost they would need to claim UC but I don’t think would have lost out in the interim?
Hi all, just to follow on from last post about getting some help via UC to cover rent during the MR period and with reference to Daphne’s post: It seems to me that unless the MR takes more than a month and a week, then claiming UC wont actually help as that’s as long as you’d have to wait (at least!!) for UC to be paid.
I believe Daphne is right in that, once the MR period is over, ESA starts being paid again INCLUDING arrears of ESA to cover the MR period. There seems little advantage ever in claiming UC in this sort of circs.
With the added risk that a claimant may lose entitlement to premiums if they do claim UC, it seems better to avoid claiming UC, chase an early decision on the MR (not necessarily easy I suspect), and await reinstatement of ESA at the basic rate pending the appeal.
Also
Re Pension Credit Savings Credit; just to clarify that both of a couple have to have reached 65 by 6 April 2016 in order to make a new claim for PC including the savings credit. see CPAG p 151.There must be 1000’s of pensioners missing out on a few pounds worth of savings credit who have been led to believe they have to much income for PC.
My client’s ESA has been reinstated pending the outcome of the ESA appeal and notwithstanding that he had claimed and been refused UC (on R2R grounds). WCA decision was made on 11/10/2017. UC claim made on 16/10/17 but not allowed (appeal still pending). On 14/05/18 ESA has been reinstated on appeal from the date it stopped and arrears paid to date. Client lives in London Borough of Kensington & Chelsea - which is a Full Service UC area. So he cannot make a new HB claim. The previous HB claim was cancelled in a letter dated 25 October 2017. Can he ask for this claim to be looked at again on the basis that he has a continuous entitlement to IR-ESA now that the DWP have reinstated and paid ESA.
I note that HB Anorak has stated in this thread that these sorts of events have been occurring. Does anyone have experience of how the Local Authority - Kensington & Chelsea act in such a scenario.
If HB was stopped in this case only because of the UC claim, that decision should be revised because these circumstances do not cause HB to end. Reg 8 of the UC Transitional Provisions Regs 2014 says that HB stops following a UC claim if DWP is satisfied that the claimant meets the basic conditions for UC, which include R2R. Otherwise there is nothing to say that HB has to end.
Hi HB Anorak,
Can I just clarify are you saying that as Regulation 8(1)(b) is not satisfied then the award for HB cannot be terminated under 8(2)(b).
Yes exactly:
- para (1) begins “this regulation applies where …”
- para (2) begins ” … where this regulation applies …”
If the regulation doesn’t apply, HB doesn’t terminate
Thanks HB. That will be a great help.