× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Universal credit migration  →  Thread

UC - Claimant Commitment

VivienneWRO
forum member

Welfare Rights Officer - Barrhead Housing Association

Send message

Total Posts: 10

Joined: 10 April 2018

Hi

I had a couple who have been moved on to UC from legacy benefits. They have 3 young children All under 5 and one of which is severely disabled) Cerebral Palsy.

The family has been told by the DWP that only one of them can be the main carer, which means that her partner has been told that he is required to look for work and has been placed in the intensive workgroup.

He is unable to look for work as between both of them they have to care for their children, due to one of their children being so ill, they are required to do physio 3 times a day and also there are frequent hospital trips including surgery.

He is not in any position to look for work or find employment due to his family complexities. I was hoping to find out if anyone has any advice they could offer with regards to the claimant commitment?

They have accepted it however, they feel they were basically told to lie in order to get their UC payment.

Kind Regards

PippaD
forum member

Benefits advisor - Maggie's South West Wales, Swansea

Send message

Total Posts: 54

Joined: 20 June 2013

I’m afraid I have no answers but have a similar situation where the family I have advised have to claim UC, basically for help with rent only.  One of the claimants is undergoing cancer treatment on SSP but doesn’t qualify for PIP. His wife works ad hoc hours and has done for years as a school transport escort. 

I advised her to put that she was a carer even though they wont get the carer element to try to prevent the harshness of the claimant commitment. She is very worried about having to be a job seeker of sorts when she doesn’t have work as she is supporting him while he has treatment and surgery and they have managed for many years without state interference onto the way they work.

The stress of this is making her reconsider claiming UC and just muddling along while he is not well enough to work. Clearly not ideal, but understandable.

In the olden days they would have claimed HB and no one would have asked her to look for more work.

Dan_Manville
forum member

Mental health & welfare rights service - Wolverhampton City Council

Send message

Total Posts: 2262

Joined: 15 October 2012

DLA claim for the child; Dad claims CA and it’s all sorted.

Dad might be stuck with 16hr work search until the DLA is sorted out but in my experience Work Coaches are pragmatic creatures; maybe you should speak to the WC direct to explain the extent of Dad’s caring role.

 

Martin Williams
forum member

Welfare rights advisor - CPAG, London

Send message

Total Posts: 770

Joined: 16 June 2010

VivienneWRO - 22 October 2019 10:52 AM

Hi

I had a couple who have been moved on to UC from legacy benefits. They have 3 young children All under 5 and one of which is severely disabled) Cerebral Palsy.

The family has been told by the DWP that only one of them can be the main carer, which means that her partner has been told that he is required to look for work and has been placed in the intensive workgroup.

He is unable to look for work as between both of them they have to care for their children, due to one of their children being so ill, they are required to do physio 3 times a day and also there are frequent hospital trips including surgery.

He is not in any position to look for work or find employment due to his family complexities. I was hoping to find out if anyone has any advice they could offer with regards to the claimant commitment?

They have accepted it however, they feel they were basically told to lie in order to get their UC payment.

Kind Regards

1. “They have 3 young children All under 5” - being a carer of these kids (if at least one aged 2 or less) puts the one who counts as the carer into the appropriate conditionality group (either no conditionality for child under 1, or WFI only for child aged 1, or Work Prep for child aged 2). Unfortunately, the couple are not allowed to “share out” childcare (the regulations don’t really recognise fully the concept of sharing childcare…)-see regulation 86 of the Universal Credit Regulations 2013 which requires them to nominate one “responsible carer” and requires that nomination to apply in respect of all the children.

2. “and one of which is severely disabled) Cerebral Palsy” - presumably this child gets DLA - if it is paid at least at middle rate care then the other parent (ie the one who is not nominated as the responsible carer) can be in the non conditionality group on grounds of being a carer.

They should immediately explain that to DWP and ask for claimant commitment to be amended.

Martin Williams
forum member

Welfare rights advisor - CPAG, London

Send message

Total Posts: 770

Joined: 16 June 2010

Dan Manville - 22 October 2019 11:29 AM

DLA claim for the child; Dad claims CA and it’s all sorted.

Dad might be stuck with 16hr work search until the DLA is sorted out but in my experience Work Coaches are pragmatic creatures; maybe you should speak to the WC direct to explain the extent of Dad’s caring role.

 

.... sorry posts crossed- what Dan said but I said it longer (oh dear why use 1 word when I can use a 1000….).

Andrew Dutton
forum member

Welfare rights service - Derbyshire County Council

Send message

Total Posts: 1964

Joined: 12 October 2012

PippaD - 22 October 2019 11:18 AM

I’m afraid I have no answers but have a similar situation where the family I have advised have to claim UC, basically for help with rent only.  One of the claimants is undergoing cancer treatment on SSP but doesn’t qualify for PIP. His wife works ad hoc hours and has done for years as a school transport escort. 

I advised her to put that she was a carer even though they wont get the carer element to try to prevent the harshness of the claimant commitment. She is very worried about having to be a job seeker of sorts when she doesn’t have work as she is supporting him while he has treatment and surgery and they have managed for many years without state interference onto the way they work.

The stress of this is making her reconsider claiming UC and just muddling along while he is not well enough to work. Clearly not ideal, but understandable.

In the olden days they would have claimed HB and no one would have asked her to look for more work.

Is this a situation in which the disabled person is treated as having LCWRA under UC rules but doesn’t meet the definition of a ’ severely disabled person’  under UC Reg 89 so the carer can’t ask for no work related requirements as there is no PIP? It seems an anomalous position as clearly care needs exist.

Has the Work Coach accepted that she has caring responsibilities?

 

Dan_Manville
forum member

Mental health & welfare rights service - Wolverhampton City Council

Send message

Total Posts: 2262

Joined: 15 October 2012

Andrew Dutton - 22 October 2019 12:20 PM

It seems an anomalous position as clearly care needs exist.

 

It might well be something Macmillan could look at.