Forum Home → Discussion → Universal credit administration → Thread
Universal Credit claim has been closed because ‘your level of income increased and results in a nil award’
Hi there,
The attachment confirms it is Full Service, so it is ok for DWP to terminate an award if earnings exceed needs figure.
Had it been Gateway, there would have been the 6 month ‘re-award’ rules maintaining a background entitlement.
Note the continued use of the mythical word ‘closed’ in the DWP letter. I suppose they mean ‘terminate’. I wonder if claimants are less likely to challenge a ‘closure’.
As you point out, you can no longer access the old journal, so how can you challenge a closure/termination if you want to argue about the numbers? Several bits of UC caselaw have already involved income/income attribution issues, so it is not as though these problems are unlikely to routinely arise.
I can only suggest you do a blind MR, and make a complaint about lack of access to the numbers/journal documentation. DWP would eventually have to produce the numbers etc if the matter reached appeal, but that is hardly a reasonable failsafe for those trying to understand the termination of entitlement - it will increase the number of appeals.
you can’t access it online but the call centre can access it. We had a client who believed she had made 3 claims—only the last one was still visible.
when I rang the call centre they said she had made 5 claims and told me what had happened to the others which was very helpful.
I guess it might be different if the final claim was closed but if she makes another she might be able to get access to what happened to the previous one.
mad, obviously but it might work.
Completely bonkers. Why not program the software to allow some kind of access for up to 13 months after the termination of a claim, thereby permitting challenge via the journal?
Completely bonkers. Why not program the software to allow some kind of access for up to 13 months after the termination of a claim, thereby permitting challenge via the journal?
That would be a good idea.
I think that the software was built on the assumption that nobody would ever need to challenge or appeal any decisions made by the DWP. When we do win appeals against closed claims, we are typically told that the case will have to be sent to “IT specialists” to work out a manual override which will get our client their arrears paid.
I’ve also had a number of cases where we’ve tried to lodge late MRs within the 13 months but have been told that the case manager has been discharged and without a case manager, no MR task can be sent to a decision maker and therefore nothing can happen. I don’t think that’s what the D&A regs actually say…
They do seem to have gone to a lot of effort to bake in an efficient process to recover overpayments though.
Hi Elliot,
This is another example of severe limitations in the UC delivery system defining and limiting the UC product and then the rights of claimants who depend on it.
It is shocking to me that access to the basic information needed for an appeal etc is limited to the DWP and their ‘manual overrides’. Think of our more vulnerable clients - unless they know about the call centre solution referred to by Sally or can some other way to invoke the IT specialists you mention, some or many people with valid grounds for challenge will simply give up. UC is making tax credits quite efficient and user friendly.