× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Universal credit migration  →  Thread

DWP plans for both managed move to UC and voluntary move to UC

‹ First  < 2 3 4 5 6 >  Last ›

Andrew Dutton
forum member

Welfare rights service - Derbyshire County Council

Send message

Total Posts: 1974

Joined: 12 October 2012

‘The purpose of the will is lost
In the search for an escape clause’

(Peter Hammill)

Owen_Stevens
forum member

UC Adviser, CPAG

Send message

Total Posts: 629

Joined: 1 October 2018

“I have a very bad feeling about this” Mark Hamill

Owen_Stevens
forum member

UC Adviser, CPAG

Send message

Total Posts: 629

Joined: 1 October 2018

All four of Baroness Lister’s recent run of PQs on managed migration have now been answered. 

The most recent tells us that of the eighty people ‘in’ the Harrogate pilot 53 had been given an initial deadline and 41 had reached the deadline by the time that the pilot was suspended.  (so we now know that 6 of 41 missed their deadline)

https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2022-06-06/HL639/
https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2022-06-06/HL641/
https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2022-06-06/HL642/
https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2022-06-06/HL640/

shawn mach
Administrator

rightsnet.org.uk

Send message

Total Posts: 3833

Joined: 14 April 2010

More from Dr Coffey:

“We learned a bit in Harrogate, but not a lot. The main thing we learned in Harrogate is not to do it the way it was done in Harrogate.”

Q95 @ https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/10490/html/

Owen_Stevens
forum member

UC Adviser, CPAG

Send message

Total Posts: 629

Joined: 1 October 2018

Owen_Stevens
forum member

UC Adviser, CPAG

Send message

Total Posts: 629

Joined: 1 October 2018

Owen_Stevens
forum member

UC Adviser, CPAG

Send message

Total Posts: 629

Joined: 1 October 2018

Charles
forum member

Accountant, Haffner Hoff Ltd, Manchester

Send message

Total Posts: 1449

Joined: 27 February 2019

It is important to note that the tidying up exercise carried out by these Regulations have the side-effect of disallowing retrospective CTC claims by newly recognised refugees. Such claims were previously allowed after legal action taken by CPAG which ended earlier this year.

HB Anorak
forum member

Benefits consultant/trainer - hbanorak.co.uk, East London

Send message

Total Posts: 2951

Joined: 12 March 2013

Interesting also that Reg 6A(4), together with the revocation of Article 7 of the no 23 Order, closes a long-standing lacuna whereby it has been technically impossible for pensioners to claim HB

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 3255

Joined: 7 January 2016

HB Anorak - 05 July 2022 11:06 AM

Interesting also that Reg 6A(4), together with the revocation of Article 7 of the no 23 Order, closes a long-standing lacuna whereby it has been technically impossible for pensioners to claim HB

Can you just expand on this please Peter? I can’t see a reg. 6A(4) in these regulations and I know that we’ve previously had discussions about people over pension-age looking like they can’t claim either version of HB, so anxious to know what’s happened.

Thanks Paul

Timothy Seaside
forum member

Housing services - Arun District Council

Send message

Total Posts: 546

Joined: 20 September 2018

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK - 05 July 2022 11:39 AM

I can’t see a reg. 6A(4) in these regulations and I know that we’ve previously had discussions about people over pension-age looking like they can’t claim either version of HB, so anxious to know what’s happened.

It’s Reg 4 of these Regs - which adds a Reg 6A to the TP Regs.

HB Anorak
forum member

Benefits consultant/trainer - hbanorak.co.uk, East London

Send message

Total Posts: 2951

Joined: 12 March 2013

It’s in Reg 4: it inserts a new Reg 6A into the UC Transitional Provisions Regs 2014 which prohibits new claims for HB except in limited circumstances.  Those limited circumstances now include where the claimant is a single pensioner or a member of a pensioner couple.

The job of prohibiting HB claims is currently done by Article 7 of the No 23 Order, which curiously makes no exception for pensioners.  there is just an assumption that pensioners are completely out of scope for UC except when they belong to a mixed age couple.  But technically the UC provisions referred to in the local commencement orders do come into force if a pensioner makes a UC claim, which triggers the HB claim exclusion in Article 7 of the No 23 Order.  There was never anything to say pensioners cannot claim UC, even though obviously they aren’t entitled to it, but the fact that they could claim was enough to block HB claims if Article 7 was taken literally.

From 25 July Reg 6A fixes this.

PS it has the opposite effect at the other end of the UC age spectrum.  Charles and I have previously discussed how, if Article 7 relies on a non-statutory presumption that pensioners are simply beyond the scope of UC, would there not be a similar presumption about children under 16 who very occasionally find themselves needing to claim HB?  Now that pensioners are specifically catered for by Reg 6A, it is harder to make that case.

[ Edited: 5 Jul 2022 at 11:51 am by HB Anorak ]
Dan Manville
forum member

Greater Manchester Law Centre

Send message

Total Posts: 485

Joined: 22 January 2020

Andrew Dutton - 04 July 2022 10:06 AM


And they aim to complete by Sept 2024?

What could possibly go wrong?

You’d think there was somebody in Government who was around last time they tried to accelerate a migration from one scheme to another…

oh!

At least I’m not working in social services any more

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 3255

Joined: 7 January 2016

HB Anorak - 05 July 2022 11:48 AM

It’s in Reg 4: it inserts a new Reg 6A into the UC Transitional Provisions Regs 2014 which prohibits new claims for HB except in limited circumstances.  Those limited circumstances now include where the claimant is a single pensioner or a member of a pensioner couple.

The job of prohibiting HB claims is currently done by Article 7 of the No 23 Order, which curiously makes no exception for pensioners.  there is just an assumption that pensioners are completely out of scope for UC except when they belong to a mixed age couple.  But technically the UC provisions referred to in the local commencement orders do come into force if a pensioner makes a UC claim, which triggers the HB claim exclusion in Article 7 of the No 23 Order.  There was never anything to say pensioners cannot claim UC, even though obviously they aren’t entitled to it, but the fact that they could claim was enough to block HB claims if Article 7 was taken literally.

From 25 July Reg 6A fixes this.

PS it has the opposite effect at the other end of the UC age spectrum.  Charles and I have previously discussed how, if Article 7 relies on a non-statutory presumption that pensioners are simply beyond the scope of UC, would there not be a similar presumption about children under 16 who very occasionally find themselves needing to claim HB?  Now that pensioners are specifically catered for by Reg 6A, it is harder to make that case.

Thank you.

Charles
forum member

Accountant, Haffner Hoff Ltd, Manchester

Send message

Total Posts: 1449

Joined: 27 February 2019

HB Anorak - 05 July 2022 11:48 AM

PS it has the opposite effect at the other end of the UC age spectrum.  Charles and I have previously discussed how, if Article 7 relies on a non-statutory presumption that pensioners are simply beyond the scope of UC, would there not be a similar presumption about children under 16 who very occasionally find themselves needing to claim HB?  Now that pensioners are specifically catered for by Reg 6A, it is harder to make that case.

Just on this point: I think it would now be impossible to make that case for under-16s, as the new Reg. 6A does not rely at all on an ability to claim UC. This more than anything is probably what prompted them to specifically include provision for pensioners in the new Reg. 6A.