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

[GiddyLurker]

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?

That budget wasn't comprehensive. For example, the other car costs are very low, £50/month on petrol is unrealistic.

We don't need to quibble - everyone knows the nurse's salary is insufficient in many areas.

It’s not the employee that’s a scronger- it’s the employer

asda are amongst some of the worst I’ve seen from wage slips, incorret as well as low paid

No new Band 1s any more but still bands 2, 3 & 4

That budget wasn't comprehensive. For example, the other car costs are very low, £50/month on petrol is unrealistic

i don’t get through £40 a month in fuel - so wasn’t unrealistic as was basing it on reality

Yes I dont have any savings as have debts unfortunately...and dont get any benefits. If i rented my income /solo parent would mean I could claim..but as i have a mortgage i cant.

Yes I dont have any savings as have debts unfortunately...and dont get any benefits. If i rented my income /solo parent would mean I could claim..but as i have a mortgage i cant.

Having a 'reasonable' holiday, or even two, would have been permitted. Europe, the USA etc is fine. Spending six months in Barbados , for example, would not be permitted unless there was a very good reason for being there.

That's only your figure, but lots of people drive quite far to work.

'Reality' isn't necessarily exactly what you do - people's lives can vary!

The problem with a cheap run around car is it’s likely to be less reliable then a newer car and costs more in regular repairs. It’s a false economy to buy a cheap car, if you can afford payments on a better one, it’s more cost effective.

Apparently average is about £120/month

You can get a very good car from a reputable garage at £170 per month, with a warranty for 1,2,3,5 plus years if you choose.

Bizarrely savings are very low, yet capital is not… a person can own a home outright of any value and if it’s their main home claim full UC and/or other means tested benefits.

Makes no sense families who rent or have a mortgage to pay if over £x in savings either get zero or tapered help, yet family could live in a £1m, £2m, £5m house owned outright and called by politicians the ‘most vulnerable’.

That is interesting, thank you.

I don't think that is bizarre at all. An asset like a house that you live in is not cash you can live off.
What would you like to see changed about that? People be forced to sell their house? Some people are only on UC for a short while as they are between jobs.

many people’s car costs tot up to £500 per month, insurance, mit, service fuel etc - so that’s the figure I got to

this is a single nurse, no children, no cats no ex in the basement

@Pickledonion1999 presumably you had a cash deposit when you bought and despite large mortgage you think this is good financial management as you have equity and will eventually own a valuable cash asset. This is not the case for somebody renting and receiving housing allowance.

In twenty years time you will profit but they are trapped in the same place.

Are you suggesting that benefits are denied to the needy and redirected to the ‘more deserving’ to get them through the expensive times before they get to realise profit?

Tell that to people on this thread who say things like people on uc shouldn't be allowed to go on holiday or have any savings.

Fgs, yes, I would use my savings UNTIL I had met the threshold for benefits.

What I would not do is spaff them up the wall on holidays etc to deliberately bring myself to that limit.
That's the point.

Or have more than 99p in their bank account... which makes no sense. As soon as they get paid their UC, they will no longer be eligible.

Lots of people's are mine included which is why universal credit exists. It's then unfair to say people on uc shouldn't be allowed any savings or to go on holiday

Exactly people are clueless.

Well, they can't exactly save up for one, can they?

And £350 a month 175 of it is probably sub prime credit interest
The car is probably nothing fancy

Don't know

Maybe the DWP has something on the way it has been calvulated

What a silly thing to say. Sounds like you're projecting.

Let me rephrase - should those in the top 40% receive benefits or are they well off enough? If the answer is they should, are you saying 60% of the UK should receive benefits?