Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To wonder why the UC savings threshold is £6,000?

856 replies

GiddyLurker · 18/04/2026 21:55

Why is the Universal Credit savings threshold set at £6,000? What’s the reasoning behind that number?

It feels quite specific and I just wondered whether there’s a particular logic or policy decision behind it?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
DotAndCarryOne2 · 19/04/2026 09:48

Gurolou · 19/04/2026 09:45

@anyolddinosaur yes there aren't many accounts that pay the kind of interest universal credit reckons you get on savings, and subtracts from you.

A quick google says otherwise. There are plenty of investment and savings account that offer the equivalent, which is roughly £20 for every £1000 saved. It’s around 2% per year.

Pickledonion1999 · 19/04/2026 09:47

Coconutter24 · 19/04/2026 08:47

If someone manages to save for a house deposit while claiming UC, how do they then pay the mortgage? If people are relying on UC to help pay their rent and bills in what way will having a mortgage save money in the long run?

Being able to save for a house deposit could for example help someone into a shared ownership property where they could buy a share of the property. They could still claim UC rent element to help with the rent part. Over time they can then purchase a bigger share of the property and ultimately own it thus meaning they don't need to be reliant on UC or housing benefit ( when retired) long term. It's a good option in some circumstances where people perhaps cannot secure a full mortgage.

Gurolou · 19/04/2026 09:45

@anyolddinosaur yes there aren't many accounts that pay the kind of interest universal credit reckons you get on savings, and subtracts from you.

DotAndCarryOne2 · 19/04/2026 09:44

ForWittyTealOP · 19/04/2026 09:37

Housing related benefits are.

Which is exactly what l’m saying. If a claimant stopped renting and bought a home, the state, in the form of UC, would no longer be responsible for paying towards their housing as there are no benefit provisions for help with mortgages. Therefore that would represent a saving for the state.

cadburyegg · 19/04/2026 09:43

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

What a horrible post. I had to justify a £5 Vinted refund.

anyolddinosaur · 19/04/2026 09:42

Cost of a funeral plus a few debts. The imputed income between 6k and 16k is so harsh that effectively the limit is 6k.

DotAndCarryOne2 · 19/04/2026 09:42

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Yes, he did. UC periodically ask for bank statements and if there’s anything on there that you haven’t declared they will query it. Money that’s owed to you and gifts from friends and family are generally disregarded unless they meet certain thresholds, but they still need to know about them. Not declaring these things can potentially result in suspension of benefit while they investigate if there are regular discrepancies on bank statements.

ForWittyTealOP · 19/04/2026 09:41

Let's also remember that the savings limit is the same for single and joint claimants. It assumes pooling of money. But people (usually women) in financially abusive relationships can't rely on this sharing of resources leaving them with little or nothing to manage crises or escape a situation.

Blondeshavemorefun · 19/04/2026 09:38

Theunamedcat · 19/04/2026 06:16

I think there should be a way to save for a house deposit that's locked away from your benefits that you literally cannot use for anything other than a house deposit (maybe a car) some kind of government backed savings initiative so you can go over the 16k limit it would encourage people to save and move house in the long term it would cut the benefits bill because they pay for rent they dont pay for mortgages

Yep. Excatly what I said

ForWittyTealOP · 19/04/2026 09:37

DotAndCarryOne2 · 19/04/2026 09:27

Landlords aren’t part of the state.

Housing related benefits are.

DotAndCarryOne2 · 19/04/2026 09:36

Apprentice26 · 19/04/2026 09:26

But in reality they dont
UC is the minimum requirement to keep people alive. They cant drop below that

Yes, they do. If you knowingly reduce your money, savings and investments, or transfer them elsewhere to get or increase your Universal Credit, it’s deprivation of capital. DWP will not reduce benefits if they judge you to have paid off debts or paid for goods/services that were reasonable in your circumstances. But if they judge you to you to have deliberately reduced your money, savings or investments, then they will treat it as deliberate deprivation of assets in order to claim benefits and for UC purposes you will be treated as still having it. It’s called notional capital. It’s perfectly legal to treat claimants this way and claimants who do this can be subject to prosecution and penalties.

Gurolou · 19/04/2026 09:36

Also lol at the idea of a person buying gold withdrawing £1500 at a time from the same bank account their UC gets paid into.

ForWittyTealOP · 19/04/2026 09:35

Gurolou · 19/04/2026 09:18

The fact that it doesn't disregard even a LISA is a massive disincentive to save, for sure. Not just for current UC claimants but for everyone. Because anyone can hit a rock in the road through redundancy or illness or divorce. At that point, there is effectively no state safety net for someone with savings. And if their savings are in a LISA, they will lose the 25% because they'll have to withdraw early. It's another of those perverse disincentives that you see all over the benefits system - for quite a wide range, you are worse off having something of your own than having nothing.

TBF I think they take that 25% into account when calculating savings. But I do agree with you. I think it's grossly unfair for someone to have what might be their only chance to buy a house taken away because of a random event like job loss.
Also, plenty of us who had children in the 2000s spent 18 years saving for them through child trust funds. If, like me, your children are disabled and may struggle to work, where does that leave your lifetime of doing what you were told was the right thing and building up savings for your kids? Are disabled people supposed not to have normal aspirations in life?

Gurolou · 19/04/2026 09:34

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

ForWittyTealOP · 19/04/2026 09:31

Livelovebehappy · 19/04/2026 09:13

It’s not a question of empathy but a question of equality and fairness. Someone receiving UC should not be better off than a large percentage of people not on UC with no savings.

Because....?

OttersOnAPlane · 19/04/2026 09:31

Gurolou · 19/04/2026 09:20

Lol you can buy gold with cash and you don't declare individual transactions under £10k. There is an entire global economy built on gold, much of it under the radar. Good luck with that.

And a large cash withdrawal counts as deprivation of capital too. So you don't get benefits.

When DS claimed UC, he had to justify every tiny withdrawals and deposit - including getting paid back £11.50 from his friend for a pizza they'd shared.

ForWittyTealOP · 19/04/2026 09:30

NobodysChildNow · 19/04/2026 09:04

There is nothing immoral about debt.

The only problem is being so deeply in debt that you can’t pay things off.

If you can save £4k (the remaining £2k being to cover next month’s rent and bills) to pay for a new car you can make a down payment and put the rest on finance. Now, instead of saving, you’ll be paying off the finance. I sold my perfectly fine car for £4k last year so it’s entirely possible.

I also do not think people on benefits paid for by the working people of this country should be able to build up savings for holidays and home improvements. Benefits should keep you just above the poverty threshold, and no higher. If we hadn’t dismantled our bus network people wouldn’t need cars. We would be better off with lots of buses creating jobs for bus drivers, rather than loads of people trying to save their benefits to buy cars.

I personally think the UCthreshold should £7k, which is 3x the average monthly take-home pay, as my mum said you should always have about 3 months’ pay in the bank as a buffer in case you lose your job.

What about working people on benefits paid by the working people of the country? What about working people whose job happens to be unpaid carer? What about working people who have lost their job and finding it hard to get another one? What about disabled people who aren't able to work? What about the children of people who aren't in paid employment?

But yes. I see what you are saying. We should definitely operate a two tier system of the morally virtuous and the feckless, undeserving rest. Perhaps we could have some sort of symbol to mark out the second class citizens? One they could wear on their clothing maybe?

Let them drive buses indeed.

Gurolou · 19/04/2026 09:29

If you can save £4k (the remaining £2k being to cover next month’s rent and bills) to pay for a new car you can make a down payment and put the rest on finance. Now, instead of saving, you’ll be paying off the finance. I sold my perfectly fine car for £4k last year so it’s entirely possible.

If you got £4k for your car a buyer would have to find at least £6k to pay for it through a dealer, especially when accessing finance. They may not even be eligible for finance if on benefits or a low income. And taking on debt with no/low savings and a low income is a truly terrible idea which no financial advisor would recommend. Replicated across the country it's a terrible thing for the economy in general.

Plus at that price the car is at/near the point where it's going to cost a bit every year to get it through an MOT. So now you've got debt to service plus ongoing costs.

This isn't a solution, it's just a garbage situation.

DotAndCarryOne2 · 19/04/2026 09:27

ForWittyTealOP · 19/04/2026 09:22

Unless you're a landlord of course.

Landlords aren’t part of the state.

Apprentice26 · 19/04/2026 09:26

Ileithyia · 19/04/2026 09:25

This is called deprivation of capital, and you will be given less UC as a result.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/universal-credit-money-savings-and-investments

But in reality they dont
UC is the minimum requirement to keep people alive. They cant drop below that

DotAndCarryOne2 · 19/04/2026 09:25

Chocaholick · 19/04/2026 08:38

No it doesn’t. The assessment is about the impact of the disability, not extra costs incurred because of it. I spend £££ on my disability but I can’t imagine it would be eligible for PIP as with intensive medication etc I live a fairly normal life.

Sorry, but yes it does. That’s the whole point. Living with a disability can be expensive and PIP is designed to mitigate some of that extra cost with a cash award depending on the level of need.

The PIP assessment directly examines the impact of disability on a range of tasks essential to daily life and mobility, as a way of determining whether the disability or health condition is likely to incur extra costs. The impact determines the level of benefit awarded in order to cover those extra costs. Put simply, those whose conditions are assessed as having the highest impact are awarded the enhanced levels of PIP because they are judged to have the highest levels of disability related costs.

If you have never applied for PIP you can’t possibly know whether or not you would get it. And if, despite needing intensive medication, you are still spending £££s coping with your disability then you are not living a normal ‘disability cost free’ life are you ?

Ileithyia · 19/04/2026 09:25

IDontHateRainbows · 18/04/2026 22:18

So what's to stop people buying jewellery/ gold and saying hey I've got less then 6k in savings now?

This is called deprivation of capital, and you will be given less UC as a result.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/universal-credit-money-savings-and-investments

To wonder why the UC savings threshold is £6,000?
Spaghettea · 19/04/2026 09:24

It's too low and never been increased in line with inflation since UC was implemented 13yrs ago. The current figures should be something like £9k - £20k limit.

I looked into it a while ago and it seems to be based on a figure back in the 80's. I went on a bit of a detective hunt via some reddit threads and old .gov documents.

SomethingSScintillating · 19/04/2026 09:23

Car

ForWittyTealOP · 19/04/2026 09:22

DotAndCarryOne2 · 19/04/2026 08:50

It would save money for the state because there is no financial help available via benefits to pay a mortgage.

Unless you're a landlord of course.