UC want all my money back…

[MapleHazelLatte]

I applied for UC when I separated from DC’s father 3 years ago. I have since been living with my parents and he stayed in the house we bought together. I’ve been asking him to take my name of the mortgage to give me my share but he just has been dragging his heels about it. I applied for UC when we split up.

i then got a notification to say I was having a review phone call. Apparently someone had accused me of still being with DC’s father. I had to send all my bank statements for the last 3 years and fill out forms regarding the house. Originally I vaguely remember they did say they would disregard the house for 6 months then I heard no more.

a couple of months later I was told I had been overpaid but it was only slightly and a manageable amount to pay back.

I’ve not got another letter saying I shouldn’t have got UC since 2022 and they want ALL the money back other than the first 6 months. It’s “disallowed” I’ve worked this out to be around £30k. I have no idea what I’m going to do. Anyone else been in this situation ??

Since leaving your ex 3 years ago, you haven't been proactive at all regarding the property you jointly own with him. The DWP gave you a 6 month grace period, in which to sort out the house you share (even though in reality the timeframe is a joke). They expected you to have done this, and advise them of the equity you received. You want to come off the mortgage, yet all you've done is ask your ex to call the mortgage provider!! Why haven't YOU called the mortgage provider and found out the process?! it's not his responsibility to call them, it's yours!! The DWP doesn't give two hoots if your ex wants to sell the property or not, that's not their problem, it's yours to resolve. You need to seek legal advice or talk to the CAB regarding the money owed to the DWP and the house. You can't bury your head in the sand any longer. The equity will be based on the market value of the property, and that needs valuations from 3 different estate agents. It definitely won't be based on a random figure out of your ex partner's head!! I'm guessing you're on the mortgage and Deeds? You also need to bare in mind, your ex has presumably been paying 100% of the mortgage since you left, therefore the money you should have contributed, would need to be deducted from your equity. You need to look into the legalities of forcing your ex to sell the property or for him to buy you out of your share. You can no longer 'do nothing'. The DWP may be willing to offer a repayment plan, whilst you resolve the issue, but they won't accept ignorance or 'not understanding' as a defence, for the situation.

But she should of been paying half the morgage since she left too 🤷‍♀️

You're not fucked. Even if the house has to be sold, and you get your portion of it and pay UC back. Are you receiving the housing element at all? Obviously if they paid you any housing then that would be void.

The 6 months was to allow you to have time to sort the house out. If you're jointly responsible for the home it will count as an asset especially since its worth clearly a lot of money. From their perspective you have a potential pot of £16k for which over that you wouldn't be entitled to UC at all. The fact you have that in savings means it will be counted. You can force the sale of the house legally surely. Until you get some outcome from that then you can't really contest the UC decision as it will gain in interest.

Not necessarily the case. Every case is different and what one couple will choose to do another won't. He could have re mortgaged to buy her out - he's done nothing except suggest she'll get hardly anything if the house is sold and he's not wanting to sell either.

Bet no one would be suggesting it if they were stepkids

Thats because IDS thinks its only the poor who should be responsible for their actions.

OP shouldn't have moved out. Made H move out. Kick up major fuss because this is his doing. But if living with parents why do you need UC?

Do you think her parents should pay for every expense she has including her kids? Stop blaming women for having to claim benefits

She’s saving housing costs, so could presumably support her kids through earning a wage?

She is working. Part time. Why has this thread turned into criticism of someone with two very young kids claiming UC?

She earns £700pm. And the father should (though isn’t) support the DC too.

Because she’s received thirty grand that she wasn’t entitled to?

To be honest I’m more surprised that you needed to rely on £30k worth of UC over the past few years whilst having significant assets, no bills by virtue of living with parents, and being employed. UC is supposed to be an emergency fund no? You clearly had better support and resources than most, to not have needed to rely on UC for that long.

She was entitled to claim for the first six months. I'm quite aware there's been an over payment

Assets that she doesn't see a penny from. Plenty of part time workers with kids claim UC. They are entitled to

But op is not entitled to 🤦‍♀️
The fact that she hasn’t forced a sale of the house three years later is on her, it certainly doesn’t mean the rules don’t apply to her.

Rules have changed since I worked at DWP but my guess is;
1.They are making an assumption that your share of the equity is over £16k. It might not be.
2.They would probably have extended the six month "disregard" if needed to sell the house or realise your share.
3 You could ask why they failed to disallow you in 2022 when the disregard ended? It's not an excuse but it seems to me they have contributed to this error.

As others have said you need proper advice. It may not be as bad as it looks.

Read the post someone has just made below

You can’t be on a mortgage in the UK without being on the deeds for the property, to ensure the lender could repossess if they needed to. The OP had already filled in forms detailing her arrangement with the house.

Op said she couldn’t take on the mortgage so moved out. I’m guessing as not explicit in op posts but assume she has not made any contribution to the house since and lived with parents as she has small children, OP would have been able to claim UC for children on part time wages but fallen foul of the capital rule with the joint property not occupying. She possibly thought ex would eventually take her off the mortgage and pay her any share but has not made any steps legally to force the matter. As we don’t know the whole situation with ex (how likely he will sell or remortgage etc) she should rightly take legal advice over her right to equity in the property.

He is by paying the entire mortgage of the house both parents own. He’s pay OP part too

She obviously isn’t entitled to though is she? Christ.

Beyond that, you are expected to sell assets instead of claiming benefits long term. Benefits aren’t for betterment, they’re for emergencies and if you have capital you’re expected to exhaust that first.

He pressured her to move out. Has told her she will get 16k from the sale of the house and pays little towards the kids. She wasn't paying the mortgage when she lived there either because she wasn't working. Im not sure why fingers are being pointed at her - he could have moved out and paid child maintenance to allow the kids to stay in their home. Courts generally rule that kids under 18 should be allowed to stay in their home. He's also refusing to sell - he could have set that in motion three years ago

The ex partner is dragging their heels over a sale. Don't Christ me. And if she was entitled to less than 16k after the sale she would still be entitled to benefit as someone else has said. She doesn't have any money from that capital - it's tied up in the house.

I am quite aware of the rules re UC given that I'm on it and when I had to sell my flat years ago - not by choice. My benefits stopped. She's on here asking for advice.