UC Sanctions

Hi,

I’m hoping someone can help me untie the knots I’m tangling myself up in on this one.

My client is a couple on UC with a youngest child aged 18 months. Mum is self-employed and the nominated carer for their child, dad is employed full time. Mum’s self-employed business is taking off and she has more earnings potential than the dad, so they are considering making dad the nominated carer of their child and he is considering stopping work altogether for now (with the hope of working in the self-employed business once the child turns 3). JCP have told them that dad may be sanctioned if they do this.

My understanding is that if dad becomes the nominated child carer, he’ll be in the WFI group. Claimants in the WFI can only be given a low level sanction for failing to attend a WFI without good reason. So, if they make dad the nominated child carer before he leaves his job, he can’t be sanctioned for ceasing paid work. Am I correct on this?

I’m also wondering whether the rule that the dad can’t be sanctioned if they jointly continue to meet the AET (from the mums work) after he quits his job comes into it? Or would this only come into play if the dad quit his job before moving to the WFI group as the nominated child carer?

Replying only to your last paragraph. According to House of Commons deposited papers only employed earnings count towards the AET in which case mum’s self employed earnings don’t count.
http://data.parliament.uk/DepositedPapers/Files/DEP2019-0980/2._Administrative_and_Conditionality_Earnings_Thresholds_v3.0.pdf
(I don’t know why that is the case.)

Thanks Ianb, that’s really useful and something I hadn’t realised. I hope someone turns up soon who can answer the remainder of my query, as at the moment the best I can offer is a ‘try it and see what happens approach’ which is altogether unhelpful for my client. I’ll keep digging to see if I can find an answer myself.

Yes, swapping the nomination for ‘responsible carer’ would mean no sanction for ceasing to work. You could also argue he has good reason for ceasing to work.

If it’s been less than 12 months since the last ‘responsible carer’ nomination, they can only change if DWP agrees there has been a change of circumstances which is relevant to the nomination, but it does sound like they may have good grounds for that. On the other hand, if DWP don’t accept he has good reason for ceasing to work, they may also try and argue there hasn’t been a change of circumstances relevant to the nomination!

I am not aware of any rule that you cannot be sanctioned if you have earnings which meet the AET. Having earnings equal to the AET only means he will not have any work search and work availability requirements imposed on him. There is only a rule that if he was to work for 6 months, earning at least his individual CET each month, then any sanction would be terminated.

Thanks Charles, I would have missed the bit about the 12 month rule if you hadn’t pointed it out.