To ask why Universal Credit is so terrible? (Not goady)

[evilharpy]

I've seen several threads (one today about food banks which I can't seem to find now) where people have had some strong things to say about Universal Credit and the feeling seems to be that it is contributing to the poverty problem and forcing people to rely on food banks and causing more problems than it's helping with.

I'm wondering what exactly makes it so terrible and why it's so much worse than what came before it. Google hasn't been much help as most of the results are just official links on how to apply for it etc. But it seems to be that it's paid monthly rather than weekly or fortnightly and there's a long wait to get it?

I would just like to understand a bit more about it. And I don't mean this to be in any way insensitive or goady.

I thought the 2 child cap wouldn't be applied retrospectively either when it was first announced. However, it seems like when people move onto UC it is being treated as a new claim so it will apply. But it's not exactly clear IMHO. And I agree the government did encourage self-employment but probably didn't expect people to take it as an excuse to run a hobby type business only earning a few pounds. A business has to be viable to count as full employment.

Job centres were actively encouraging hobby businesses.

I am single, live alone, sick and disabled and get PIP. At the moment this means I meet the criteria to receive a severe disability premium which is about £60 extra a week. The severe disability premium is being abolished under UC and it works out I will get approx £36 less a week than currently. It's a big cut. I will have transitional cover but eventually it will work out £36 less a week.

However, it seems like when people move onto UC it is being treated as a new claim so it will apply.

I know in my area (I don't know whether in all areas) those with 3 children can't apply for UC but must still apply for tax credits and housing benefit separately meaning they get tax credits for all 3 children. I hope this continues as applying it retrospectively would be very punitive.

I am disabled & need more support (not talking about financial) than I currently have.
I am not yet on Universal credit but my area has now gone live so if I make any changes at all, I will be forcibly transferred having to go through the 6 week wait with no income, eventually receiving less than I do because the amounts are less for the same circumstances on UC.
Currently my housing benefit is paid directly to my housing association so from day 1 of the change I would be expected to pay the rent so I don't fall into arrears during the 6 weeks out of my (non existent) savings.
Some people are still not receiving the money they should after 6 months, so ideally I need 6 months rent, utilities, food etc....
I have been saving as this terrifies me, so far I have managed to accrue 2 1/2 weeks of rent, utilities & £10 a week (for my 2 1/2 weeks) to cover food and anything else.
By utilities I mean gas, elec, water, council tax & broadband - nothing else.
If I lose my home by not paying the rent, this counts as making yourself intentionally homeless, putting me not only on the street but also at risk of my son being taken into care.

My family live far away in an area it is hard to get social housing in but due to a once in a lifetime opportunity, I would (under the old system) be able to move to within 10 minutes of them - this would actually help both myself & my son more than I can say, but unfortunately under UC rules, if I was to move, it would immediately trigger this change, 6 weeks minimum no money coming in at all & I would lose any transitional protection for no other reason than that I had moved to a different place.
Moving would have given me the local support I need which would have helped me try to find some sort of employment.
I live in an area with high unemployment rates & massive poverty.
I live in an area where it is not even possible to register with an NHS dentist if you are over 18 & has not been for years.
My family live in an area where there are signs in the window of their local dentists saying NHS patients welcome.
I live in an area where half a dozen doctors surgeries closed down last year so now I don't even have a doctor.
Many thousands of people then had to try & register with the remaining doctors in the area at the same time.
The nearest surgeries to me (by which I mean a cab ride away as I am not able to drive) have notices up saying they cannot take any more patients.
Getting to the nearest doctor was a big enough issue that the local council used to fund a service to do that from my area so patients paid a subsidised rate of just a few pounds, but due to austerity that service has now gone.
Where my family lives they have NHS doctors with space with transport to them.
I would have been moving to an area with job opportunities as well as having a support network which I badly need.
Because of UC, I have had to turn down the best opportunity to improve my life I've had in over a decade.
I cannot possibly try to find enough money to move & support us for between 6 weeks & 6 months (time waiting for UC) as well as take the loss from the amount I get now & the lower amount I will get under UC if I move.
The first 2 weeks of those 6 weeks btw, you do not ever get paid for, so just for having something change, even if it is for the worse, you get penalised.
As long as I stay here with no hope of anything getting better, nothing should change for me, at least for another year or so.
By the time I can fund moving, the opportunity will have long passed.

I live in the uk, I was born here & I dream of a world where I can have a doctor & a dentist.
That is life on UC.

ps meant to say next to non existant savings. - It has taken me many months to save the little I have.
I also know many people worse of than I am on benefits, it's not the amounts so much as the terrifying uncertainty of how you will survive for an unspecified amount of time with nothing.
At present, if one benefit does not get paid, another will.
With UC, it's all or nothing.
I have had various benefits stopped for no reason anyone could figure out in the past, there was never any warning.
The same is true for UC.

Look up universal credit IT costs. Feeding trough for Tories.

Universal credit covers 6 benefits rolled into one

But

It doesn’t include council tax relief- so you still have to apply for council tax relief at council in exactly the same way as people used to claim for housing benefit and ctx relief

What I don't understand is why don't they close the loop holes to make employers pay a living wage instead of putting it towards uc/ tax credits?

Because the employes a) vote tory and b) donate to the tory party.

People on variable hours/zero hours will find that they will rarely be awarded the right level of benefit because the system is really only geared up to stable earnings. Any overpayments will be repaid regardless of whose error it was.

I wish people would check their facts before posting - the real-time information from HMRC ensures that the DWP will know automatically how much claimants earn in a month and can alter payments accordingly. The problem, as some people have pointed out, is with people who are paid weekly due to there sometimes being 5 weeks in a month.

sashh to be fair, the company I work for is in a competitive industry. It pays just above minimum wage has a good turnover but not a huge profit. If it started to pay well above minimum wage it would cease to exist. If the service user price went up no one would use it anyway they'd go to a competitor. Bigger companies making millions on the back of cheap labour is another story.
I'd say the biggest problem is the cost of housing unless you are in LA or a HA property the rents are beyond the scope of most wages.

What counts as low income?

Well let's be honest, did any of the previous systems have people raving about them? The old style 'dole' etc?

No

Nothing will ever be good enough. There will always be complaints about whatever system we end up with

I have no problem with the concept of it at all - rolling all Benefits into one and simplifying the system is very sensible. I also don't think anyone (unless genuinely unable to work) should have the option to be on Benefits long term.

It's the administration of the system which appears to be the issue, not the concept itself.

k2, the concept is not just one of rolling benefits into one, it is also a cost cutting exercise, eg. the removal of severe disablement allowance, which means that disabled people are suffering cuts in their income when they cross over to UC.

What counts as low income?

it depends on your circumstances. but there are income thresholds and they are all different depending if single, couple, children (how many), disability, childcare costs etc.

Clearly the DWP need to get much better at the admin of these systems so that people aren't suffering with lengthy waiting periods or the over-payments that happened with WTC. However, there is no bottomless money pot, and the sense of entitlement that lifestyles will be supported has to alter.

People cannot choose to have large families and stay at home until they all leave school and expect it to be bank-rolled. This country has to get back to a greater sense of personal responsibility and fast, and then perhaps there will be more money available to help those who truly cannot work.

Yes, obviously we can't all predict the future, we can't predict illness/injury etc. - everyone is well aware of that. Having children is such a huge responsibility though, and a bit more attention to when people have them, how many they have and who they have them with is desperately needed though, only bringing them in to stable relationships which have a better than average chance of lasting?

People have the right to be a SAHP but it shouldn't ever be at the cost of others. It's a decision that the household income must support not benefits.

Absolutely! Ditto the cap on benefits for 2 children - completely gets my vote. Have as many as you like, when you can pay for them, but don't expect a funded choice to have extended families.

Dreading uc. I get about £185 in ctc a month. At present I wouldn't even say I'm dependent on it but I judt forsee some massive issue with uc when it gets here that will cause huge problems for me. I only have sympathy for anyone getting more it's very scary

Yes, obviously we can't all predict the future, we can't predict illness/injury etc. - everyone is well aware of that. Having children is such a huge responsibility though, and a bit more attention to when people have them, how many they have and who they have them with is desperately needed though, only bringing them in to stable relationships which have a better than average chance of lasting?
You cannot predict relationships or how they will go.

@Gilead Yes but a 6 year relationship is more stable than a 4 month one isn't it.

Yes, obviously we can't all predict the future, we can't predict illness/injury etc. - everyone is well aware of that. Having children is such a huge responsibility though, and a bit more attention to when people have them, how many they have and who they have them with is desperately needed though, only bringing them in to stable relationships which have a better than average chance of lasting

Totally agree. Some people put more thought into their take away order than they do about choosing the partner for their children. Others think they need to have a child to keep the man, have a child with every new relationship etc.

We may not be able to predict illness or injury (although wise to have a rainy day pot) but the costs of having children is known and no relationship is cast iron so why on earth people think they are and don't even consider the future where they may have to pay for those children is beyond me. So many are so blasé about the fact that they don't pay to support their own children, there's no responsibility anymore for many.

All getting a bit handmaids tale. Let's decide who can have children...

@Queenofthedrivensnow No, but if people decide to have children then they need to be able to support them.

Yes but a 6 year relationship is more stable than a 4 month one isn't it

Not really. I was with XH 5 years, married and had DS1 after 3 years. Got battered regularly and escaped.

Was with DP less than a year when I fell pregnant with DD, DS2 followed 11 months later, not married yet a far, far better relationship.

The problem I have with it is that it states it makes it easier to work - but not if you have paid for childcare. Tax credits would pay you immediately for childcare, with UC I have to pay first and then send them receipts every month. How they expect me to find £500 when that's more than I get a month in UC I don't know.

And despite what they say it is considerably less than tax credits once you're in work. According to Entitled To I am £100 a month worse off on UC than I would be on TC for exactly the same amount of hours worked.