Universal Credit should relax £16,000 savings eligibility rule

[DreamChaser23]

do you agree? This is to ensure other workers who were laid off and have 16k OR higher in savings should also be eligible for help.

www.google.com/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/dwp-must-change-universal-credit-21792760.amp

Having worked with people on benefits and UC in the past, it will be interesting to see how a lot of people with high IQ and EQs, with drive and initiative cope with UC. Obviously not everone in the "benefits class" is stupid, unintelligent, but a large number have not achived a great deal educationally FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS often outwith their control. But...

Augurey
£16k savings is a huge amount. The average family has less than £1k
That's not true, over 2/3 over people have more than £1500 saved.

You sounds very smug at committing fraud to protect your savings. Ah, such a hard life you have.

@TheArchSorcererofContwaraburg what I was referring to was that - if you have an average paid job - there is no incentive to save, because if you do you will inevitably get shafted by the system.

This thread proves why most people start their adult lives voting Labour, but when they become wise to how the system works they will become Tory.

The number of overgrown children shouting about how people with 16k of savings are vastly rich is stupifying.

Btw, if you think there are any fraud investigators currently working on fraud you are very very naive.

Oh I see! It’s okay to commit benefit fraud because you’re unlikely to get caught right now.

The vitriol spewed here towards seriously impoverished people who commit benefit fraud is extreme - do you think you’re better than them if you’re doing it out of greed rather than necessity? IMO that makes you far worse.

Of course the rule shouldnt be relaxed.

This thread proves why most people start their adult lives voting Labour, but when they become wise to how the system works they will become Tory.

Jellycatspyjamas So somebody on double my salary should get UC but because ive saved for an old age, i shouldn't,
shouldn't it be done on your recent wages?

1 in 4 families have less than £95 in savings Hester. A quarter of adults have no savings at all.

16k is a lot.

Smug? Maybe. Planning ahead is always wise. Obviously a lot of people haven't had the time to do that, but to anyone reading who thinks their job is at risk it's worth looking into

Even better ..it isn't actually fraud

Hope that annoys you even more

The number of overgrown children shouting about how people with 16k of savings are vastly rich is stupifying.
The number of overgrown children whining “it’s not fair” while they sit with tens of thousands in the bank is stupefying.

And pretty insulting for those living hand to mouth on the very benefits system many are now decrying as unfair.

Augurey can you back that up?

To be honest, the majority of families have £1,500 OR less in savings. If you can get £16k savings that is a lot. And people say "saving for a car or wedding." Surely your basic necessities have first before your wants

16k is 10 months at 1500 a month

Use it. What did you think it was for? You have savings, you've lost your job. Perfect, you have savings.

I suppose the difference is that the self employed and employees are currently getting help regardless of savings. I’m all for saving government money and ensuring that taxpayers money is properly distributed. But I can see an argument in these times for more generous benefits if we are using government money to subsidise the wages of employed and self employed.

Jellycatspyjamas Do you think people on benefits should paid the average salary?

This thread proves why most people start their adult lives voting Labour, but when they become wise to how the system works they will become Tory.

Not the people I know, toryandproud, and thank god for that.

what I was referring to was that - if you have an average paid job - there is no incentive to save, because if you do you will inevitably get shafted by the system.

You have a very different idea of getting shafted than I do. DWP shafting people is people who are too sick to work being refused ESA, assessors outright lying to refuse PIP to disabled people, sanctioning someone who was in hospital.

Being shafted is not refusing to give you money you don’t need until your savings drop below a level that’s higher than the poorest 19% of the population earn in an entire year.

Tonyaster Maybe you are saving it for retirement, etc, i am being punished for saving

Jellycatspyjamas So somebody on double my salary should get UC but because ive saved for an old age, i shouldn't,
shouldn't it be done on your most recent wages

Whether it should or not, it’s been this way for years and no one was complaining because it only affected the feckless workshy scroungers. Now it’s impacting those with a bit of money and a lifestyle to maintain its suddenly not fair.

Deathgrip And 81% earn more, whats your point?

Even better ..it isn't actually fraud

Well that depends what you do with the money. But regardless, if you’re so well off that you can entirely dispose of savings over the cut off (by spending for example) with no ill effects, you have no need for UC.

Deathgrip And 81% earn more, whats your point?

🤦‍♀️

Eh, I don't think so. I've saved a lot of money over 4 years, for a house deposit but also for period where I've been out of work due to not liking my job.

I save precisely so I can be ready for an emergency, and it's not a problem if the car breaks down or I get made redundant. The money from the government isn't "free" - we will be paying it back in spades, with less funding for public services and higher taxes. I'd rather not take when I didn't need to. The state money should be as a last resort for people who really need it.