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?

If you’re on benefits you can’t have the expectation of new cars & holidays. Working people quite regularly don’t get them 🤷‍♀️

I think it's a shame (and slightly horrifying) when people do this. Because two possibilities exist. Either you* begrudge disabled adults and children the extra money they need to manage disability related costs. Or you think that they're fraudulent, only claiming to bump up their income. Either way, this has been influenced directly by government and the media - they have told you what to think and you're complying. They are doing this for a reason and you are not stopping to ask what that reason is.

*Generic you, extended to anyone who argues that benefits aren't set at impossibly low levels purely because of the existence of sickness and disability related benefits.

But £6000 is the point at which benefits are cut.

i don’t think it is accurate to suggest that benefits start to reduce “slightly” for anything over £6k when the truth is they are reduced to nil by £16k. 100% is hardly “slightly”.

We can’t pretend that benefits, if DLA or PIL is involved, aren’t absolutely ridiculous.

pop onto ‘entitle to’ and enter details for a non working parent with 3 kids, with a disability in the family. The results are staggering frankly.

Now go look up the prices of disability adaptations, aids, therapies, treatments, specialist transport etc.

Being disabled can be extremely expensive.

We have a free NHS.

How is that relevant?

It doesn't pay for a great many needed items, treatments, adaptations.

Benefits are very carefully worked out to ensure that costs are met and no more than that. So no, they aren't ridiculous. They're part of a system, one which is not generous, that provides what is needed to live on.

But I know your views and in your fevered fantasy world, provision of £5 a week and a bowl of gruel would be an adequate sufficiency. To you, benefits claimants need to be punished.

“A fortune in benefits”

I’d laugh if this wasn’t such a stupid and destructive thing to say.

The vast majority of those claiming UC are working, minimum wage isn’t enough to live on, so even those working full time qualify for some UC to make sure they can pay their rent and feed, clothe themselves and pay utilities. Everyone gets caught out with an unexpected expense sometimes, either a fridge/freezer or washing machine needs replacing, or the car that you need to get to work. If you have no savings how can you replace/repair these things? £6k isn’t much, and those who manage to save anything whilst on UC are budgeting every penny and living frugally. No one deserves to live in poverty, and in fear of not being able to afford to fix their car or replace their fridge.

And there's the problem.
If someone can't replace a secondhand car, how do they get to work? Especially if rural.

Do not engage with that poster. They hate people on benefits.

You really have no idea. My friend just took her LA to tribunal to get a space at a SEN school for her DD. It has cost her thousands of pounds in solicitors fees. She is highly qualified but cannot work full time because at the moment her DD is only managing 2 hours a day in a mainstream school. Even when she starts at her new SEN school my friend will not be able to work full time because wraparound and holiday care is not an option for her DD. Her DD may need care as an adult too so my friend may never work full time again. Her DD won’t cope with the long journey to the school from where they are living now so they are moving to be closer - more money needed for moving costs. Yet some people resent her claiming DLA.

There are more costs to disability than just going to the odd appointment. People should actually listen to those needing disability benefits rather than making sweeping statements about how ridiculous they are.

We rent and work and are on UC.

If we get evicted by our landlord, we need around £5.5k to move (deposit, first month's rent, moving costs).

We don't currently have £5.5k or anything near that but I'm hoping to get there over the next year as we're under threat of another eviction (landlord may sell) after only having moved recently (landlord sold). If we couldn't have any savings or the ability to save a bit while on UC, how would we find somewhere new to live? If having around that level of savings meant we couldn't get UC, we would then have to use those savings to pay rent/bills... and then would once again have no money with which to find a new flat.

I know. I typed out half my reply before looking at the username so thought I might as well finish before I give any further engagement a miss!

Just in case... Might be worth checking if your local council runs a rent/deposit scheme. Some do but ime do not like to publicise it!

Should be set at zero IMO. Many who hold down jobs who dont qualify for UC dont have savings either.

Thanks - I knew it had never been increased but it now seems incredibly low.
I'm thinking its not much of a cushion for anything, my Dad used to joke it was enough to bury you, but ... its very low.

I suppose that’s one way of avoiding the maths

You’re all so ignorant to the actual

I get £1100 a month because I also work

£650 rent
and then the adult rate

and a child rate can’t remember what they specifically are but I only earn £800 from work so I have £1900 to pay for my car bills as such as petrol tax and insurance and repairs , my rent, my food bill, my daughters dance bill, full council tax with the 25% discount, childcare and all the things like gas electric nothing much more than that but apparently it’s a fortune and we all earn thousands that make us rich on UC have a day off!

How many people actually get adaptations though? The majority of new applications are for mental or non-physical conditions. This outdated image of most disabled people being very physically restricted and vulnerable just isn’t the true picture any more.

Yes, c’est la vie.

Not true, benefits are very generous in the right circumstances

Tell me what then, because I must be doing benefits wrong.

I agree. How else can they save for a house an not pay rent and in the long run save uc thousands every month

some people spend it on drink /cigs/drugs/takeaways v someone saving £50 a week for example

they both ‘use’ the money but for different things

£6k isn’t a lot. Yes I know the max is £16k but people trying to save so can have money for a car /washing machine /boiler or whatever without using high interest credit

This isn’t necessarily true, if you are renting with children and both parents working, benefits could be very generous. But so they should be - the government gives no shits about the huge levels of inflation year on year with no wage rises to match. It’s an impossible situation for many.

To everyone hating on those on benefits, it’s a minuscule bit of money every month in comparison to the thousand and thousands of pounds all my wealthy clients are desperate to get out of paying tax on. We’re talking people with tens of millions in the bank. Let’s not even talk about the billion dollar corporations!

Let the little people save up for a house or a fucking holiday for goodness sake.