Savings limits - time for it to be upped?

But I think they would count towards the 16k UC limit surely.

It is not about the ability to save £16k. I is about what you have in savings. People who apply for benefits and have £16k will get nothing. People on benefits who come into money wont have saved that much... they will have inherited it, been gifted it, or won it. Or they sold some high value items.

People on benefits who can save should be encouraged to do so. Being able to save does not mean they are being paid too much. Some people will live very frugally so they can save.
There is even a Gov backed scheme called Help to Save where low earners on UC can get a 50p bonus for every £1 they save over 4 years.

And if they don't ever improve they continue to be a drain on the system think about it

You rent they pay you over a thousand pounds in rent in some areas a month if you can buy your own home you get a slightly bigger work allowance nowhere near the rent payments

No-one who has a second property gets benefits it's classed as savings

How is it right that as a disabled person I'm not allowed to save (because being disabled is expensive) but it's ok for those who work the minimum to receive benefits if they have thousands in savings, a second property, etc?

Absolutely. When DS1 was small the system was much kinder and fairer. You got a chance to build a future if you were willing to work. If not then you were stuck on unemployment benefits. The vast majority of people I knew gradually upped their hours as their children grew up and (especially if they had a partner) came off tax credits. A lot had done additional training, bought a basic house etc so their long term finances were much more secure. Now everyone is lumped in together as a scrounger who should be grateful that the workhouse is a thing of the past. It's so divisive and short sighted and it now feels like it's designed to punish and humiliate people for being less well off. I'm not saying the government should buy everyone a house (though people don't seem to object when the recipient is a rich landlord) but a savings scheme for a house deposit is a sensible thing. Building an emergency fund to cope with an unexpected bill is similarly a good thing and for this the current limit is probably about right. Things like school trips cost money and are hugely enriching, especially for pupils whose families cannot normally afford those experiences. Anyone who says tough, poor kids should stay at home is overlooking the value of cultural capital and raising aspiration. Again, I'm not saying a two week ski trip but everyone should get to experience things like museums and theatre. It all adds up. People who are saving on UC will be living frugally to do so and deserve to have some reward for their efforts.

it is different and I completely support those on low wages working full time getting UC top up. But I fail to see how if someone is on too low a wage to be able to afford rent by themselves would be able to save up more than £16k. If they are able to save that amount then their wage is enough and shouldn’t be topped up by benefits.

I would love for there to be a scheme in which people can save only for a property deposit - similarly to a LISA but even more restrictive. I would also love world peace. Both things are never going to happen. And no, the cap shouldn’t be upped. It’s overly generous as it is. £10K sounds about right.

I think it should be upped and may do the economy well if it is. People on benefits (most of which are topping up low incomes for hard working people or for disabled people) will never be able to save for a deposit on a home. That means when they reach retirement age they will be dependent on housing benefit and the council will be paying all their care charges. If they own a home at retirement no need for housing benefit and if they need to go into a care home their home contributes to the care costs.

FWIW
Yes. there should be a cap on savings for those on benefits.

Because some people work & never claim benefits, so they pay into the "pot" for people on benefits.

For those who would like a higher amount

20K ?

30K ?

The average wage
35K ?

There has to be a cut off at some point ?

They were different because the circumstances were different if you work full time but the average rent is unaffordable there is very little of anything you can do about that. It’s not comparable.

Read the thread this has nothing to do with savings and tax.

You can have a certain amount in savings accounts before paying tax
( not including ISA, LISA, Premium Bonds which are tax free)

https://www.gov.uk/apply-tax-free-interest-on-savings

Ref Government protected accout"

Each person can save up to a maximum of 20k each, per year into a tax free ISA

Each person under a certain age, can save into a LISA, tax free

Each person can save a maximum of 50K into Premium Bonds & all winnings are tax free

If you do not work, a person can save a maximum of £2880 per year into a SIPP pension & the tax will be added on top by the Government for free

Therefore, these savings already exist

Other savings are liable for tax !

I think it should. If you’re working full time and earning as much as you can and it’s still not enough to live comfortably a tax credit top was more to counteract piss poor wages.
I view that very differently to choosing not to work or being temporarily unemployed and claiming unemployment benefits.
Now both cases fall under UC.

It shouldn't be one rule for people on one working age benefit and another if you're on a different working age benefit.

Tax credits are (or were) benefits. I never understood why the rules were different.

If your mortgage is under £300 per month I’m going to very much assume that you weren’t a first time buyer this year.

The national average for a 3 bed is £290,000. If you somehow manage to get a deposit of £40,000 a mortgage of £250,000 at 4% over 25 years will be £1300 per month.

There are many many parts of the country where you can not find 3 bed houses that cheap (unless they are falling to bits)

So my point remains - people I know locally in social housing are paying £800 a month for 3 beds, you won’t get a 3 bed for less than £300,000. Where are they finding the extra £500 a month from if they are on benefits? And how does any of this help them get off benefits? Owning a house doesn’t change your earning potential or ability to work.

I think it should be separated out again as it was before with tax credits. This allowed families in full time employment to have enough to live on plus be able to save towards getting a mortgage etc.

Since the introduction of UC, those people are lumped in with the work refusers and everyone is seen as a benefit claimant

What about all the families who are £1.- above the in work benefits amount?

Just saying, a lot of people are struggling not just people on benefits. Many are living from hand to mouth and don't have significant savings of 16, 10 or even 5k.
I don't think the savings cap should be changed at this moment in time.
Change the low wage economy, get inflation in check and make housing (rent & mortgages) affordable first.

I think personally you should be able to put money in a government protected account that you can't access and save more like for a house deposit or for a car without it effecting your benefits

Whilst claiming benefits?
Come back from Planet Entitlement,take benefits; money from the public purse to fund your car/house purchase???
This is a new level of crazy.

If you have the ability to save £16k plus then , no you shouldn't receive benefits. To actually state how can one save for a house etc, do you think other ppl should cover your benefits so you can save for a house?
I'm stunned ppl think like this, benefits are there for times of need to support low earners etc not enable huge amounts of savings.

@OrwellianTimes it depends where you live. My mortgage is just under £300 a month. 3 bed terrace. It would cost me around double that to rent it. So it makes clear sense from everyone's point of view if I stay in the house rather than be forced into rental.
As for the person who thinks the savings limit should be reduced to £2k, if you know where I can get my car or boiler reliably replaced for £2k I'm all ears. Wouldn't want my family of unwashed rogues to drain the middle class tax payer after all.

This thread is depressing. Full of people thinking that they should be rewarded by the government for doing the right thing by working hard and saving money, whilst saying that people that have not done the same should get fuck all.
Benefits are for people who are not working, either from bad luck or illness, and people who are not earning enough. If you have over £16k in savings, then you will not be eligible for benefits. It does not matter how you got that money.

I am on UC, and I have managed to save a bit in the past.... a result of living like a pauper, and selling a vehicle I could no longer use (whish still put me at under £6k btw). With the cost of living now, it is very hard to not even be overdrawn by the end of the month.

It is shocking to see a PP suggest that the savings limit be dropped to £2k. That is nothing. I have spent more than that in the past couple of years on my dog. I don't drive, but someone with a car could need that money for repairs. And shit happens in 3s.... the fridge is bound to die in that time too. Everything electrical and costly in my house is 14 years old... I can guarantee my appliances will be in cahoots and decide to fuck me over within the same month.

£16k is the cut off for benefits, but it tapers from £6k... and bare in mind if you are on UC, you have to justify any big spends so it is not seen that you are intentionally spending to stay on benefits. You could be a homeowner on UC, and release equity so you can replace your kitchen... and the DWP would be asking if it was really necessary.

I think some people here would like to go the early days of the dole when someone from the Job Centre came to your house and told you to sell personal items before you could claim anything.

Plenty of people who work full time qualify, it depends on circumstances like if you have a partner, how high rent is, if there's childcare costs etc. But the a massive amount of people claiming UC work full time above minimum wage

The welfare state is.a safety net, an absolute poverty prevention mechanism.

For homeowners almost everyone should have some form of income protection insurance to pay the mortgage if they lose their job.