Truly shocked by Tory bank trials for benefit claimants.

I absolutely agree - it’s all about how it looks and not what is cost effective and most efficient. Politicking at its very worst.

It makes it impossible for people to get themselves out of poverty. How can you save for a house deposit / emergency repairs etc?

Same with UC paying rent but not a mortgage- it would be cost saving for the government to pay poorer people’s mortgage than a landlords. At the end of it they’d own their house rather than renting forever and UC paying their rent forever before being in poverty as pensioners. It increases the social divide because rich landlords are getting their mortgages instead!!

Sorry yes that’s what I meant as the level where it starts to affect the UC amount

Maths doesn't work like that. It was 8% who might (because of things like different levels for different benefits, house sales, settlements for injuries/compensation, loans being deposited and not yet spent on disabled facilities, backpayments of benefits like PIP that should have been awarded over a year ago, etc, etc) have £1+ too much out of the cohort that they specifically targeted for inspection.

Not 8% of the population. Not all claimants, not all fraudulent, not all holding tens of thousands of pounds.

@Silveroaks the savings limit for UC is £16,000. Between £6001 and £16k capital is assumed to produce tariff income of £4.35/month for every £250 or part thereof.

Sorry I don't believe a word of this, proof please.

Surely it’s pretty straightforward for there to be a conversation about it on the UC journal ?

‘your bank balance shows 50k. Please can you verify this and explain by x date as the savings limit is 6K. Here is some information about what we can disregard etc etc’ then the claimant can respond and either it’ll be ok or not ?

Im not being manipulated at all. I actually disagree with majority of what the conservatives do especially the way they are planning to treat those on PIP. This however seems like common sense to make sure only those eligible are getting UC

Thank you for posting some facts.

They will not be welcomed by some here!

But you can claim benefits with savings if you’ve given enough in national insurance within a recent timeframe. So if it’s a stop gap then you can claim even if you have savings.
And if you haven’t given enough then why not?

Im in favour of higher taxes funding more social spending and higher benefits by the way, but I also think people should be trying to give to society where they can - maybe someone can’t work due to a disabled child needing 24 hour care- then let’s support them properly. But if someone hasn’t worked for years because theyre choosy about where they work and yet want to have a bank full of savings then why on earth should the nurse, teacher, and road sweeper living down the road be funding their lifestyle.

Wish they would chase tax dodgers with as much scrutiny and gusto

Yes, and? The fact someone has a balance on this assessment of bank accounts tells you nothing about whether it was already declared.

You're letting yourself be emotionally manipulated by the Conservative Party, which you're entitled to do of course, but personally I think it best to take a facts-based approach.

There is no savings limit for pension credit. the first 10k is disregarded and then above that the amount of pension credit a pensioner can receive is reduced slightly. So if a pensioner had a low income and high savings and was disabled they could likely still qualify with 50k in the bank.

Yes but not pensions or PIP like the last post suggests.

These are low income benefits

How ‘low income’ can you be with £50,000+ sitting in a bank account?

Erm, read it yourself :

held by individuals receiving Universal Credit, Pension Credit, or ESA (Employment and Support Allowance)

Pension credit = pensioners

if that’s the case they will have been able to declare it - at the time of UC application is specifically asks for account balance/ s and you are made aware to notify of any changes

This is the sort of check and policy that will actually save money , not targeting those on pip etc. the rules re savings are clear for UC so account checks are a good thing

Op the only thing that shocks me is people like you who rent out 11 homes and still claim benefits yourself !

Pension is income.

That.

Exactly.

The article doesn't show fraud, it shows balances.

It is amazing how little understanding there is of the system, really.

It does but it can't even get the capital limit for Pension Credit right.

Having 50k doesn't automatically mean they are defrauding, that's the point. You've jumped to the worst conclusion which is the intended outcome - you're allowing yourself to be emotionally manipulated by a political party, which is not a healthy place for you to be in as you're having your chain pulled.

In some situations people are allowed capital - for example if paid out for an injury that means they can't work.

Just look at the comments literally refusing to read it and throwing toys out of the pram because, after beating the ‘fraud is a tiny issue’ drum for years, they’re embarrassed to be proved wrong!

What's shocking me is that this check isn't routine!

READ THE ARTICLE!

It specifically says low income benefits

Not PIP, not pensions.

Yes, let's just ignore the truth when it shows that benefit claimants aren't the salt of the earth.