To believe UC needs a bloody makeover!

[Lovethystupidneighbour]

Don’t panic - not a benefits bashing thread.

I see a lot of negativity around the benefits system in the UK (namely UC) but it needs to be said that in the right circumstances you can be very comfortable on benefits. It seems the government is incompetent and distributing these benefits efficiently. Why do some people get too much money and others get not enough to breathe on? Seems bloody ridiculous to me. UC is not fit for purpose!

AIBU to think they need to create a better system? How is this the best they can come up with?

What would the benefits overhaul look like to you, OP? ( genuinely curious).

People like to deny it for some reason, but if you have disabled kids you can really clean up. I got 3-3.5k a month in benefits when I had 3 disabled school age children. That was high DLA for all 3, Full UC with elements etc. No housing element as I own my house and my ex paid the mortgage. I am not on any benefits now other than carer's allowance which is a pittance and an insult.

I agree with the poster who said that some people get too much and others get too little. I never needed 4.5k a month which included maintenance as well etc.. However if it's any consolation to anyone, my life was hell, I have no career now and I still have caring responsibilities to worry about.

@Lovethystupidneighbour the amount of money you receive (I’m thinking specifically around health conditions here) is directly correlated to your ability to communicate. Specifically to communicate how your condition affects your daily living, mobility, gets in the way of working/looking for work etc. It’s also correlated to how much energy you have to jump through the required hoops whilst sick or disabled, or how much support you have, or knowing where to find support. So in my opinion, the amount of money you receive is dependent on knowing what boxes to tick and what words and phrases to use. The forms are very daunting. With the average adult in the UK having a reading age of 9, some don’t stand a chance.

Im doing neither..

UC is a pretty fair benefit, if UC is the only benefit claimed people are never worse off for working. It gets a bit more complicated if people have a disability and recieve other benefits.

I definitely believe the calculations need altering. I don’t understand how the government think I have X outgoings so need assistance, but someone with a mortgage somehow doesn’t? They should be able to get an element too. On the other hand, 85% towards childcare seems excessive. Otherwise if you have no children it’s very very low! Or for single parents without a second income and the cap, that also seems unfair (especially for those with little to no maintenance from other parent)

Sometimes they aren’t though? I guess that’s my point. More than paycheck to paycheck is great and ideal! Many get way less though and many get way more…

Some do get too much. My father has a neurological condition, with DLA high rate care and mobility, state pension, pension credit etc, not including housing benefit, he gets around 2k a month in his hand. He doesn't need any special therapies or adaptations, or carers even though his condition is quite severe and he was awarded DLA indefinitely many years ago. His money mounts up in his account and he can accrue thousands as he doesn't really get out to spend it. It would be a different story if physio were of any use to him, he could spend money on that, but at his stage, it isn't.

Conversely there are also lots of folk who probably don't get near enough. It would be ideal if it could be done on a case by case basis depending on evidenced costs of therapies, aids etc, but there isn't the resources to do that.

Yes I get plenty to cover rent and childcare. But I also have plenty more when our wages come into it. I probably need 3500 living paycheck to paycheck. 1000 more than that seems a lot when we allegedly can’t afford to increase benefits for others/improve the NHS/etc etc. Guess in the grand scheme of things it’s not a huge amount

You’re not DWP so you don’t know whether your £1500/mo that calculators show should be closer £1100/mo is an overpayment or not.

£6.5bn of UC overpayments due to DWP error were done in 2024 alone, affecting 12.4% of claimants.

DWP do take the money back once they realise their error. They can deduct it from future benefits payments and there is a law currently with the HoL that will give them the power to just direct debit it from your bank account.

It’s not really true that people on a mortgage don’t get any help.

however, you have to accept that it’s logical that UC doesn’t fund someone’s asset right? It is right that the government doesn’t buy a property for some people and not others, right?

renting is the safety net. Home ownership is the luxury.

I earn 55k (so 15k is taxed at 40%). This is £300 a month less take home pay than if we both worked full time on nmw.
DH is unable to work due to ill health.
2DC.
Mortgage.
UC calculator indicates we are entitled to zero.

They only just did a makeover they can't do another one every five years.
Previously there were multiple different benefits now universal credit is just one with different aspects that's why it's called universal credit. And using online technology like the journal so users can keep track of all jobs they apply for and leave messages for their coaches. It's actually better than the old system, some people just love to moan and demand everything is changed every couple of years as if that will make everything perfect?

Sorry sounding like a government shill here but what is the point of your post some people get more than others because they have children and rent their home of course they get more than a single unemployed man living with his parents. It's a universal mixture of old benefits like child tax credit and housing benefit that said unemployed man would never of recieved

Dh earns 60k. We have one severely disabled child. We get nothing for UC ( not complaining about this). We got nothing at 50k either. I guess in your case it must be the childcare costs.

@Snailiewhalie do you rent?

however, you have to accept that it’s logical that UC doesn’t fund someone’s asset right?

It does though, landlords!

And the high rent, OP must live in a very expensive postcode to be able to get that much money

"do you rent?"

No so probably that as well. I expect though that in this case when the childcare stops so will top ups.

We did get a small amount of UC when dh was earning high 40k but when I started getting Carers Allowance that pushed us out of it as that counted. Again not complaining

What are you talking about? Benefits are given based on your own circumstances.

The reason it does that is you can’t decouple that from business (well- it is business)

if they don’t find landlords people wouldn’t have anywhere to live. If they didn’t fund landlords they would be able to pay rent to corporate landlord like housing associations or government landlords like councils

its not the same as buying John smith a house with taxpayer money. I agree it’s not ideal, but it is a business transaction.

At every income bracket there will be some people that adapt & make sacrifices & some that will live beyond their means, have debts & interest that they are paying off & will be badly struggling.

There's people on here on 100k joint income who post saying that they are really struggling & see friends & colleagues on similar incomes having nice holidays, new cars etc.

It's definitely tougher the lower the income but there will always be some that manage better than others on an identical income.

Sorry, crosspost

And yet the universal credits criteria doesn’t actually logically apply that at all. We have rather unique circumstances whereby I’m entitled to universal Credit but because I have a outright owned property that my children live in that I don’t live in. They deduct the entirety of the cost of that property to rent to a private individual and take that off the universal claim.

Where as if I sold the house and we all lived together in a big house and throttled each other that would be absolutely fine.

So I thought right? We’ll call that business then. And I’ll deduct what they don’t pay in rent from what I don’t receive an income putting me in a minus situation. But no.
There’s absolutely no logic or nuances allowed.

There is no logic to your proposal. Of course the tax payer shouldn’t fund you when you own a revenue producing asset. Take the money out of that, THEN come to the taxpayer when it runs out.

im 😱 at your bizarre logic and how right you think you are. How unbelievably entitled

After work cut my hours to 1 day per week at most I went on UC in January. I seem to get around £450 per month on UC if I don’t work (1 month I got no work.) If I work and earn £450 per month I don’t get anything more

Asked why because I thought you got something up to a certain point but still not been told why.

Don’t have rent or mortgage but £450 only covers council tax and heating lighting and house insurance. Food, insurance, tax and petrol for my car. My car is essential as I couldn’t afford to get anywhere or do my job if I had to use public transport.(£12.30 per day if my working day coincides with train timetables).Often it doesn’t .
Atm I am putting everything on credit card. Then there are the repayments of said credit card.

Went for several jobs but as I never heard back presumed I hadn’t got them. One did email me about 6 weeks later that as I hadn’t replied to texts or phone calls they had given job to some one else. I had no missed calls and no texts

I can’t seem to get the universe to play fair.