Savings limits - time for it to be upped?

[Goose38]

Just wondering if anyone knows if there’s any plans for the savings limit to be upped .
I think it’s crazy it’s been capped at 16k for so many years, this needs updating.
How is anyone meant to improve their lives with such a low limit . If anyone knows of any government petitions etc would be grateful.

What would be wrong with that?

If we would pay £800 towards their rent, why can’t we pay it towards their mortgage? One way means they get a house out of it and eventually won’t need / will need less benefits. The other way means the state pays the same but someone who already owns a house gets another house at the end.

I feel like changing that system is a win / win?

So if you own your own home and claim UC you should never be able to replace your kitchen for example or other major home repairs. They would be paid for you and you would receive more “tax payers money” if you rented.
You should never be able to save a deposit for a cheap studio flat rather than rent and save “tax payers money” by no longer claiming the rent element?
I think £16k is a reasonable cut off for new claims or gifted money, compensation etc .However if you choose to save your benefits over a long period of time you should not be penalised for that.

What I find annoying is how some people get a lot because they don't even attempt to save and some people get nothing because they saved. I get some people can't but it's unfair to penalise those who plan ahead sensibly.

My own example was that I found myself laid off while pregnant and my partner left me at the same time. I had been saving caredully for maternity leave and to pay for child care when I went back to work. When I went to the job centre to claim JSA when my child was 3 months I was told that I was eligible for over £2000 a month... but she retracted this because of my savings + I got my maternity pay in a lump sum, but this was supposed to last up to a year. I got JSA for 6 months and that was it. Also she told me about various schemes but all only if you get UC. Basically I would have been financially better off with no savings which shouldn't be the case...

It made me angry as I for once, after working for 20 years needed help and I was locked out of everything due to savings.

From what I've seen there are a lot of people who could save but don't. Also there are a lot of people who hide their savings and still claim, but I'm not up for dishonesty like that.

£16k sounds like a lot but my outgoings for bills and childcare are now £4500 a month (that's literally just mortgage, bills, nursery, minimal food) as I live in London so you can see why I was trying to be careful and create a buffer, but instead I used most of it just to stop myself from losing my house before I got another job...

Because benefits are there to help you when you're down on your luck, not to buy you a house. If you want to own a house you need to buy it with your own money.

If you already own your home and you lose your job benefits covering your mortgage payments short term until you get a new job would be fair but you can't expect someone living on benefits long term to be able to buy a house.

I did things like sell my stuff and not buy anything for myself apart from maternity clothes for now 2 years to save up. I'd have been better off not selling my furniture and spending all my money on clothes instead of being sensible. Why should I be treated so differently to another unemployed single mother just because I've been sensible?

By the way , I wouldn't have expected or wanted to get the full £2000 or so in benefits, but it annoyed me that I was locked out of everything + out of every other scheme because they're only available if you're on UC.

I also know lots of elderly people in a similar boat. Expected to use all savings to pay for expensive care whereas someone else who's been on benefits all their life gets everything complete funded including fitting a new bathroom and insulation in the house they owned. It's not just benefits, it's all the additional schemes which the savings threshold locks you out of.

It is low. It's just that wages are also ridiculously low and haven't kept up with inflation.

@byteme1011 why should the taxpayer pay for your upkeep when you have £45k sitting in the bank? I’m glad you didn’t get additional benefits in your situation. The limits are there to stop people grifting like you wanted to do.

When I’ve had periods of unemployment in the past I’ve done temp jobs like receptionist jobs to get by. Took all of 24 hours to get work. Obviously not a fortune in pay but it stopped me going on benefits whilst I looked for work.

Im sure you’ll have a reason why you’re entitled to live at other peoples expense whilst you preserve your cash reserves though….

Are you having a laugh?

people really do expect things to be handed to them on a platter these days don’t they?

Oh no, they can only keep £100 per month of the free pension that they didn't 'earn' by working and paying NI contributions, but rather by claiming benefits and being given NI Credits?

Whilst living in a home for FREE, and getting all meals and bills for FREE?

It isn't about jealousy and envy, it is a fact.
The feckless ones win in the end.

If you genuinely believe that to be true then walk the walk.. nothing stopping you quitting your job and living off of benefits if it's that easy and you'd be better off why don't you do it?
Because the reality is you don't want to live like that. Who would? It's shit. You probably want security in your home, not to be forced into high priced, unstable rental housing. You probably want to know you can meet the bills at the end of the month and have somewhere to live when you can't work any more. I'd imagine you'd like to be able to provide for your children if you have them. The majority of people on benefits are no different you know, just don't have the same privileges that others have.

This is very true. There are a lot of elderly people we know nearby living off their own savings in threadbare homes while people we know on benefits get disability allowance in old age and grants to upkeep their property and spend willy nilly. They didn't earn it so don't care as much.

And why should I be penalised for needing to claim UC?

We own our house. Why can't I save to get the damp course needed? Or the desperately needed new kitchen because it is affected by damp?

People aren’t poor if they have £16k in the bank.

Yes I mean 16k cap before UC stops .
Mostly for saving up for a house etc or homeowners for repairs etc .

It actually hasn’t been raised for years so not in line with inflation which would make it roughly 26-28k in today’s money . Which is a more reasonable limit.

Yes some of you are correct it does trap you in the system, and good suggestions about raising the 6k to 8k before deductions.

If you have 16k or more when transitioning you only get one year on Uc and you’re losing 2k for that year due to deductions.

Then after the year not eligible at all , so what happens if you don’t have enough for a house deposit, just saved for nothing, as it seems transitioned people are expected to live off the savings.

The system definitely needs updating with inflation.

Yes the savings level should have increased since 2010.

Indeed - the long term suppression of salaries following the last Labour governments use of in-work benefits and massively expanded university education, to hide the growing number of unemployed, without any investment in areas that would absorb all these graduates is shameful. Watch for a re-run…!

But, as the average savings in the uk are around £11k and one would expect those on benefits to have a lower than average amount of savings the current levels seem fine, of not generous, to me. Sure, have a 6 month window or so,et ing where savings are ignore, but after that I fail to see why the taxpayer should fund those with way above average levels of savings. Savings are in part for a ‘rainy day’ , and if one’s claiming benefits that would seem to be a rainy, or at least gloomy, day and the time to use them!

If you truly believe that being 'feckless' is in fact a masterplan, just do the same.

If you're clever enough to spot the real winners in the system, surely you're also clever enough to do as they do.

Lots of things haven't risen in line with inflation, the government should look to raise public sector wages in line with it before looking into stuff like this. Plenty of people have periods where they have to live off of their savings, can't say I can get too worked about it remaining at £16k.

That was my first thought, however I can see how someone who came into some inheritance, or got a divorce settlement or simply saved a deposit and lost their job may be in a position to buy a house in the near future, if they didn't have to spend this money on day-to-day living. Ultimately they would spend this in a year and then the government would end up paying their rent for who knows how long. There must be a better solution.

People should be disincentivised from claiming UC. It shouldn't be the default and people should be motivated to move away from UC wherever possible and to support themselves. The system simply isn't sustainable otherwise. If you have more than £16k then you can afford to sustain yourself for a period of time. You might not want to do this but the fact is that you can.

I feel like many on this thread think UC is an equivalent income to source to money earnt through employment or other ways that don't depend on the government handing you money. This is why people are happy to 'optimise'/milk the system and there is very little pride associated with actually being able to pay your way.

It reminds me of when posters on MN emphasis how important it is to be 'financially independent' and then it materialises that they get a huge amount of UC and financial support from the state. They are in fact totally dependent on the state and will have to jump through any hoops the government dictates.

Yanbu. It's not increased in line with inflation for a decade.
They increased the child benefit earnings limits so need to increase the UC ones too. Second hand cars have gone up a lot in the last decade. It's bad enough being on UC but trying to get out of it without any debt (and no luxuries) is added stress.

They are disincentived.
It isn't the default.

But life happens.

A welfare safety net protects both society and the individual from the randomness of life.

If employers were to pay better wages and landlords weren't so greedy maybe they could do without the benefits needed to make up the rest? You cant actually claim if you have more than £16k so no I don't have that much. I am bemused why so many seem jealous of those who claim (and who usually work).

I can't actually believe this post is real. If you have £16,000 in savings then you should absolutely spend this before the taxpayer gives you more money. I think it should be reduced to circa £5,000.