Is this just getting ridiculous! UNIVERSAL CREDIT

No problem, its what I do as a job 😊

Ah ok, thank you for explaining it a bit better! X

There's no earnings limit for someone receiving the carers element of UC- the UC overall award simply "erodes" the more earnings there are after any relevant work allowance; carers allowance is different and subject to an earnings cap. And obviously anyone claiming carers element, if earning, still has to be meeting the other requirements, ie 35hrs plus of regular and substantial care.

Oh yeah I know about PIP. But yeah you're right, I think it must be that they have carers element. They have a limit on what they can earn and are probably just on the higher end of that?

Yeah pip and UC are totally separate. You're right the other person would also need to be in support group for UC or whatever it's called now. To be entitled to the caring from the other one? It does seem confusing. I still don't get why people discuss it as it seems to lead to ill will or misinterpretations.

The PIP entitlement alone won't remove the work related requirement for UC- the LCWWRA element of UC would also need to be in place for the person claiming PIP. I do have clients in receipt of PIP and on a UC claim who haven't been assessed as having LCWWRA and some who work in a role which fits around their disabilities/health conditions. The two don't go automatically together under the current rules. And I completely agree about the balance of working and caring as that's me- it is very challenging.

PIP isn’t an out of work benefit, so it’s possible that they are not required to comply with UC related job search because of severe disability. And if one partner is on PIP, it’s very possible that the other is claiming the carers element of UC, in which case there is no compulsion to work, because to claim the carers element they are expected to be caring for the person for at least 35 hours a week. They’re probably doing well to hold down something part time because caring duties can be exhausting.

PIP isn’t an out of work benefit, so it’s possible that they are not required to comply with UC related job search because of severe disability. And if one partner is on PIP, it’s very possible that the other is claiming the carers element of UC, in which case there is no compulsion to work, because to claim the carers element they are expected to be caring for the person for at least 35 hours a week. They’re probably doing well to hold down something part time because caring duties can be exhausting.

This couple were on UC, one of them works part time, the other is on PIP (don't know what the 'etc' is?) Why don't they make the part time one do more hours/get second job?

How do you know so much about other people's benefits? I find it weird that people discuss it. When they would never discuss their salary.

Potentially because the one working part time may be the carer of the other. Carers on UC have no work related requirements. They can work but don't have to.

This couple were on UC, one of them works part time, the other is on PIP (don't know what the 'etc' is?) Why don't they make the part time one do more hours/get second job?

How do you know so much about other people's benefits? I find it weird that people discuss it. When they would never discuss their salary.

I think you'd need to have a quite a high rent and a few kids on the claim to get UC at earnings of 50k. When you have kids or someone on LCWRA it becomes quite a generous benefit with the work allowances and taper rates.
I came across a couple this week. No kids .One of the couple couldn't work due to health. The other working part time earning £1200 a month with a social housing rent of around £400 a month. They were getting around £1000 UC per month UC plus PIP etc.
It's the single people with no work allowances that struggle. For them it's a very basic amount to live on or a small top up to help with rent. If you are single and have a mortage and lose your job you are pretty stuffed.

To be honest UC continued to pay me money after I had told them I was moving house on a certain date. I would also no longer be eligible for UC and my account was closed

I was told to wait and they would get back in touch for repayment. Which they did 2 years later. Except instead of using the dates I had given they made up their own about a week earlier and they wrote to me saying that they were going to take payments directly from my salary
The amount I supposedly owed was so much more than I thought it would be. I am not convinced that there isn’t a scam going on.and instead of around the £450 I had worked out I owed the amount was £1000 more.

I called them to put right the dates and amounts but apparently they had put a notice on my journal a month after I had lost access to it 2 years before and was told I should have replied to that notice.
It was a bizarre conversation this woman repeating that I owed this money and as I didn’t dispute the letter sent to my journal and refused to pay back the money then they were taking it from my salary

When asked how I was supposed to read a letter sent to my inaccessible journal . How was I even supposed to know that a letter had been sent. She repeated that I owed the money etc etc

Sent a SAR request and have not heard back from them for over a month. Going to have to give them a follow up letter

Whilst some people might be going on UC to commit fraud I am not sure if there isn’t an internal problem as well.

Years ago I received a letter telling me I had been overpaid by over £8000 in child tax credits and could I repay it.

Sent a SAR request to find out how I owed them anything given we never claimed tax credits or any other benefits.

I got an email back with what looked like a photo of a computer with my name written on the computer and a line which said CHILD TAX CREDITS OVERPAYMENT £8000

I ignored it

I do wonder if someone who worked for the Tax Credit Department just used my name to claim money then to balance the books put it down as an overpayment.

We live in a world where people receiving free money (to them) complain about a system that is designed to weed out fraud. Yes some of them also pay tax but that doesn't negate the need for balances and check.

Is it inconvenient and inconsistent? Probably. Is it worse than the tax system in general at the moment? No.

Millions is lost to fraud every year- multiple addresses are used in several types of fraud, ask anyone who has worked on a fraud team for DWP. The GP thing is also to check people are registered where they say they live- and that their children live there. No doing fraud checks because "most people have nothing to hide" is not a viable idea-some claims go on for years and run to many thousands of pounds, doing checks is what has to happen- if you don't want the inconvenient complication of checks, don't claim.

So had a review with UC today phone call she stated she would up date the journal with what I need to provide.
A full length photo of myself standing outside my front door with the key in the lock!?
Then a letter from the children's school & nursery saying they attend there
A letter from the children's gp
Passport photos
Child benefit award letter
Birth certificates (they have had birth certificates before )

This isn't a new claim either I dont understand why gp letters are needed they want one for me and my partner too.

Also on the phone call asked who I use for my gas and electricity
Ive never been asked these things before seems strange to ask?
Anyone else had a review lately what did they ask for.

Partner works full time if that matters.

That’s got to be annoying for schools and doctors. Also how long would it even take to get a child benefit letter. You only get one when you apply. Would be over 9 years out of date now and wrong address.

There are resources to help vulnerable people claim- many charities, Citizen's Advice etc- suggesting claims should not be checked for fraud because people might fall through the net is mad- people always fall through the net of any system. If you feel so strongly volunteer at your local library to help people with their claims.

There are resources to help vulnerable people claim- many charities, Citizen's Advice etc- suggesting claims should not be checked for fraud because people might fall through the net is mad- people always fall through the net of any system. If you feel so strongly volunteer at your local library to help people with their claims.

I just think it's a very sad indictment of our society that many honest and vulnerable people may lose out on the welfare our country claims to offer them because it has become too complicated to make that claim. That they have to prove they are not making a fraudulent claim.
"Don't claim then" seems such a dismissive response.

Millions is lost to fraud every year- multiple addresses are used in several types of fraud, ask anyone who has worked on a fraud team for DWP. The GP thing is also to check people are registered where they say they live- and that their children live there. No doing fraud checks because "most people have nothing to hide" is not a viable idea-some claims go on for years and run to many thousands of pounds, doing checks is what has to happen- if you don't want the inconvenient complication of checks, don't claim.

Millions is lost to fraud every year- multiple addresses are used in several types of fraud, ask anyone who has worked on a fraud team for DWP. The GP thing is also to check people are registered where they say they live- and that their children live there. No doing fraud checks because "most people have nothing to hide" is not a viable idea-some claims go on for years and run to many thousands of pounds, doing checks is what has to happen- if you don't want the inconvenient complication of checks, don't claim.

Not exactly, it will also depend if you get rent element in that benefit, for example. Because then you will also need a tenancy for that address. But yes I can see how it could otherwise be possible for some to get around it..

Do you have evidence that millions is claimed fraudulently by people claiming to live at multiple addresses (along with their children).

If someone has nothing to hide (which is most people) then a visit would be quite fine, I'm sure. Knock on the door - here I am - bye.
People are not complaining about the intrusiveness so much, it's how complicated it is. I mean, just talking to someone at a GP practice takes patience, resilience, some free time and possibly money (to pay for whatever UC are asking for).