Four single mothers win high court Universal Credit battle against DWP

[userschmoozer]

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jan/11/four-single-mothers-win-high-court-benefits-battle-against-dwp-universal-credit

This is possibly the first step in overhauling the UC system and at least removing the worst abuses.

Many thanks to these women and their lawyers for showing this as it is.

Thank you for posting this usrschmoozer. This is going to be a huge relief for so many people. I'll sleep a bit better tonight!

The inhumanity of the tories re benefits is deeply terrifying when you are in a shitty situation and needing to claim. They know they are wrong but still they fight it all the way in court. But I'm glad that we have a step forward.

I actually felt a little bit hopeful after reading this

How I would love to buy those women a very big drink

So proud of these women

Wow. That is brilliant

brilliant. how anyone could design a system that build in such huge fluctuations in payments and not realise the disruption it would cause is a mystery

in fact I'm inclined to think they did realise the disruption and either didn't care or actively welcomed it. it feels like a way of punishing the poor.

Well done, those women and their lawyers. "Fair and compassionate" my arse!

This is really important because of the work allowances - if you're paid "double" one month, it doesn't even out over the year. Here's an extreme example of what could happen pinched from the MSE forum:

Anne, a single parent, owner occupier, UC claimant, earning £409 each month and paid at the end of the month, has an assessment period of 15th to 14th of following month. So one monthly pay in each assessment period.

Brenda, a single parent, owner occupier, UC claimant, earning £409 each month and paid at the end of the month, has an assessment period of 30th to 29th of following month. Because of the dates her employer pays and reports her salary she may have say 6 months with 2 pay packets in the assessment period for UC purposes and 6 pay packets with none.

Anne's pay each month comes within her work allowance so she gets the maximum UC award throughout the year.

Brenda's pay only uses her work allowance for 6 months of the year. For the remaining 6 months, 409 x 0.63 = £257.67 is deducted from her maximum UC award. So in total she may be paid £1,546 (= 257.67*6) less UC than Anne over the year.

For above example: in practice, obviously, most claimants earn more than that and have fewer "double" months. But every double month means the work allowance business reduces what you get over the year.

The original tax credits system is what allowed the majority of working single parents to enter the workforce (along with childcare). It was a lot simpler; they used to ask for your last 5 weeks wage slips, and calculate your entitlement based on the average.
You then got that for the next 6 months regardless of small fluctuations in pay. If your hours or pay fell drastically you could ask them to recalculate.

Tax credits also didn't exercise control to the nth degree over the lives of claimants, as UC does.

For anyone wanting more information on how this supposedly simplifying benefit plays out on the ground and in real lives, I recommend:

www.katebelgrave.com/category/welfare-reform/

It's interesting how often "simplifying" and "streamlining" are code for "fucking people over (mostly women)".

Isn't it just?

I think these women are amazing.