Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
durhamborn

Universal Credit New Thread.complete Disaster.

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, fru-gal said:

Isn't it harder to get DLA for kids these days (or PIP/ESA for adults)? Thought the tests normally mean most people get zero points?

Yes. Also results in rejection for eg. statemented children with genetic disorders such as chromosome duplication and quite severe mental and physical disabilities. But they can manage a short period of answering tick-box questions on self-care and reading as an 8 year might do, despite being 16.

Not my child, but our society has a diseased sense of priorities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, spyguy said:

In which case Id recommend you contact Chardonney Tenkids for the part of Scrooge and ask her to distribute a bit of her 60k equivalent income to the poor, single, childless 40h working person playing Tiny Tim.

Excellent response to a ludicrous and facile accusation.

Edited by mrtickle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, mrtickle said:

Excellent response to a ludicrous and facile accusation.

'err boy, Wazza, here's £50, go and buy the biggest  fexxing chicken bucket from KFC ....'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, fru-gal said:

Isn't it harder to get DLA for kids these days (or PIP/ESA for adults)? Thought the tests normally mean most people get zero points?

Its harder to get DLA mobility,its just as easy as ever to get care.If you get the doc to sign as ADHD or some other behaviour name you will get it.Iv known plenty of people get 0 points and then go to appeal and get it for life (they usually define that as 10 years before you need to apply again).

I know a woman 58 who is probably the fittest person i know of that age who has got carers allowance for 20 years.She had a bad back genuine when she got it,got better,but then claimed depression.She is out every day with her sisters,pub lunches etc.Zero wrong with her.At the same time other people who arent very well are working to pay for it for her.The system is a disaster.In the North east now your lifestyle doesnt depend on what job you can get (apart from for a very small minority) it depends on what benefits you can scam.Tax credits are very generous,add in DLA for a child that then allows carers and also doubled tax credits and its like landing a £30k a year job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/12/2017 at 9:09 AM, durhamborn said:

Its harder to get DLA mobility,its just as easy as ever to get care.If you get the doc to sign as ADHD or some other behaviour name you will get it.Iv known plenty of people get 0 points and then go to appeal and get it for life (they usually define that as 10 years before you need to apply again).

I know a woman 58 who is probably the fittest person i know of that age who has got carers allowance for 20 years.She had a bad back genuine when she got it,got better,but then claimed depression.She is out every day with her sisters,pub lunches etc.Zero wrong with her.At the same time other people who arent very well are working to pay for it for her.The system is a disaster.In the North east now your lifestyle doesnt depend on what job you can get (apart from for a very small minority) it depends on what benefits you can scam.Tax credits are very generous,add in DLA for a child that then allows carers and also doubled tax credits and its like landing a £30k a year job.

Grass the f**ker up then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tax credits are also another subsidy to corporate UK.  They should be paying real wages and people should be working full time.

Such subsidised labour also reduces investment in equipment (the car wash effect) which contributes to low productivity.

Went to a couple of economic seminars recently.  It's benefits or pension payments that are driving our structural deficit.  Nothing else is anywhere near as big.

Benefits and pension payments roughly equal in size.  Tax credits are a major part of the benefits bill.  The numbers are screamingly obvious - we will never reduce the deficit without reducing benefits like tax credits.

Or, to sum it another way, the UK is borrowing to pay tax credits.  That's the enormity of the problem in addition to the other preverseness mentioned in this thread.

I saw IDC and co differently after being shown the data.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/12/2017 at 9:17 AM, durhamborn said:

We have a massive problem in this country with this.There are odd cases where people are left with nothing.There is also a lot of real poverty among unemployed or under employed single people.The welfare system fails them.No doubt about that.However there are huge numbers of people getting massive amounts of free money.

A couple both on ESA and linked benefits get £570 a week in hand between them BEFORE housing benefit.Think about that.In my home town if you have a child with some made up ADHD or something and are on tax credits and get the DLA you get more than the best private sector job pays in the town.There are hundreds of these.When i was on the council i saw the figures for the town.Labour were wanting them to claim how poor the town was etc.59% of working age people were getting tax credits,DLA etc.44% of the houses were getting over £10k a year in benefits,only 12% of the houses were paying in more than they got out.

I dont think people understand just how insane it all is.Brown created a disaster.Out of my friends from school.The ones with grandchildren now are the ones whos daughters/sons etc are all on tax credits,not working or working 16 hours.The ones who have working children mostly dont have grandchildren.Darwin would of loved it.Reform will only come once the country is bankrupted through inflation at the end of the next cycle.Until then nothing will change.Its too far gone.

 From a few months ago, but worth a mention ..

Universal credit ‘penalises the self-employed’ report warns

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/oct/29/universal-credit-penalises-the-self-employed-report-warns

 

Quote

The LITRG expresses most concern over the “minimum income floor” (MIF), a claimant’s expected monthly income after tax and national insurance have been deducted. It is used to calculate universal credit payments but can penalise low-paid workers whose monthly income fluctuates, and result in some having their entitlement to state support severely curtailed. Documents from the Office for Budget Responsibility suggest that the government stands to reduce universal credit expenditure by £1.5bn by 2021-22 as a result of the MIF.

Anne Fairpo, chair of the LITRG, said: “The last 10 years have seen a significant rise in the number of people who are self-employed, many of whom are on a low income and therefore unable to afford professional advice. Universal credit is gradually replacing working tax credit as the primary welfare support for low-income working-age people.

“Perhaps the most concerning part of the self-employment regime under universal credit is the minimum income floor, which fails to account for fluctuating earnings or one-off large business expenses.

“This can lead to a situation where a self-employed claimant with fluctuating earnings can receive substantially less universal credit than an employed claimant earning a similar annual income above the level of the current minimum income floor. We cannot believe that is an intended consequence.”

The government has already introduced a 12-month “start-up period” when the MIF does not apply in an attempt to lessen the impact on entrepreneurs. However, Andy Chamberlain, from the Association of Independent Professionals and the Self-Employed, warned that it was not enough.

“Fluctuating income, typical among self-employed people, can make it extremely difficult to meet the requirements of the minimum income floor,” he said. “Unless the self-employed business can reach the minimum amount required every month, access to credit is stopped. The majority of the self-employed have been operating for over 12 months, so the start-up period that has been offered does not solve the problem,” he said.

The LITRG, an initiative of the Chartered Institute of Taxation, calls for self-employed claimants with fluctuating income to be able to average their income over a period of up to a year. It also demands changes to the calculation of the MIF and an increase in the start-up period from one to two years.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Saving For a Space Ship said:

 From a few months ago, but worth a mention ..

Universal credit ‘penalises the self-employed’ report warns

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/oct/29/universal-credit-penalises-the-self-employed-report-warns

 

 

Surely the trick would be to leave the money in the company in the 'good' months and draw on that balance in the 'bad' months to give a relatively constant income, which works better for UC calcs. Delayed gratification isn't probably a strong point for many these days though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Tulip_mania said:

Surely the trick would be to leave the money in the company in the 'good' months and draw on that balance in the 'bad' months to give a relatively constant income, which works better for UC calcs. Delayed gratification isn't probably a strong point for many these days though.

Self employed don't have a company. The money comes in when it comes in, you don't pay yourself a wage. Some jobs can be very seasonal. Our window cleaner takes two months off over winter as his arthritis in his hands is too painfull in the cold (result of a life time of cleaning windows no doubt).

The genuine self employed are going to get hammered in due course because of all the made up non jobs (nail bar, dog walker etc)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Pitchfork said:

Self employed don't have a company. The money comes in when it comes in, you don't pay yourself a wage. Some jobs can be very seasonal. Our window cleaner takes two months off over winter as his arthritis in his hands is too painfull in the cold (result of a life time of cleaning windows no doubt).

The genuine self employed are going to get hammered in due course because of all the made up non jobs (nail bar, dog walker etc)

You can inc as a sole trader or inc. - company relates to tax and law, no whether you have backup.

I dont see many dog walkers, nail bar workers competing with plumbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Tulip_mania said:

Surely the trick would be to leave the money in the company in the 'good' months and draw on that balance in the 'bad' months to give a relatively constant income, which works better for UC calcs. Delayed gratification isn't probably a strong point for many these days though.

I know someone who's self employed and going through a UC claim to get housing benefit due to Jan - Apr being their very slow months, and a change in circumstance. (loss of v. cheap housing ).

The Job Centre staff told them exactly that.

It looks like they will have to close their business and become unemployed, as the UC rules are inflexible, as to self emplyed variable incomes.

They have been told they will get £0 U/C as self employed as the “minimum income floor” (MIF) assumes they earn min. wage 

They were on tax credits due to S/E low income, but having now made a Uc application, they cannot go back to tax credits (£50 per week as single worker)

Not being told this would happen, or about the “minimum income floor” (MIF), it appears   they would have been have been able to carry on their biz while having to find another £30 a week for rent 

 

(rent is £80 / week , but they would have got £50 T/C)     

Edited by Saving For a Space Ship

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really cant comprehend the uk benefits system. If it was amazingly generous across the board, or stingy to everyone, or paid more to those who paid in and a safety net to others, that would make sense. But then you get a single man like my friend, who has worked and paid tax and national insurance continously for 26 years, suddenly lose his job and only be entitled to 75 quid a week when others who have never worked and contributed nothing get many multiples of that. How is it fair that he is the one who the gets the subsistance level? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nothernsoul said:

I really cant comprehend the uk benefits system. If it was amazingly generous across the board, or stingy to everyone, or paid more to those who paid in and a safety net to others, that would make sense. But then you get a single man like my friend, who has worked and paid tax and national insurance continously for 26 years, suddenly lose his job and only be entitled to 75 quid a week when others who have never worked and contributed nothing get many multiples of that. How is it fair that he is the one who the gets the subsistance level? 

I know someone who worked for 30 years gets £75 a week as you say.I also know a couple worked 4 years of the last 25 who get £600 a week.I also know another couple who have never worked since school (30 years) who get £680 a week.Most of the problems were caused by Brown,before him there were some problem areas,but he sent benefits to the moon with massive % increases each year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nothernsoul said:

I really cant comprehend the uk benefits system. If it was amazingly generous across the board, or stingy to everyone, or paid more to those who paid in and a safety net to others, that would make sense. But then you get a single man like my friend, who has worked and paid tax and national insurance continously for 26 years, suddenly lose his job and only be entitled to 75 quid a week when others who have never worked and contributed nothing get many multiples of that. How is it fair that he is the one who the gets the subsistance level? 

The original system ~1945, paid based on contributions with limited additional support for those without contributions. Gradually over the years the additional support became more significant; from a 'rent rebate' to £5-16k/year housing benefit, £10/week child benefit to Tax Credits with add on for ADHD etc. 

Now many of these changes have their reasons; Housing Benefit exploding was caused by Right to Buy, which many working people benefited from personally, but unwittingly removing their children's housing. Child Tax Credits (which were an expansion of previous allowances) were well meaning as a response to child poverty, but missed the obvious point that not having more than 2 kids is a much better way of avoiding child poverty.

But I agree that the system is pretty rubbish now for those who have worked (paying tax and NI) saved a moderate amount who get nothing if they lose their job, while those who don't work (or work 16 hours) get up to £20k tax free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Around half (49%) of the UK’s self-employed are in low pay, measured on an hourly basis, compared with around a fifth of employees (22%). Average self employed earnings £208 a week Average employed earnings £313 a week (ONS)

http://www.smf.co.uk/publications/tough-gig-low-paid-self-employment-in-london-and-the-uk/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GinAndPlatonic said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-43257000/benefits-system-overhaul-as-universal-credit-is-introduced

BBC reporter Ben Moore has been been travelling around the UK meeting those who are on the front line of the change, and hearing from those who have experienced problems with the system.

...and doing his best to ignore those in the vast majority who have not experienced problems with the system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, mrtickle said:

...and doing his best to ignore those in the vast majority who have not experienced problems with the system.

How does a single mum have an unexpected 3rd child?

It would suggest shes not single.

By 2022 7m household exprcted to be on UC.

Maybe someone needs to explain why alomst half of working age household needs benefits?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/02/2018 at 1:47 PM, durhamborn said:

I know someone who worked for 30 years gets £75 a week as you say.I also know a couple worked 4 years of the last 25 who get £600 a week.I also know another couple who have never worked since school (30 years) who get £680 a week.Most of the problems were caused by Brown,before him there were some problem areas,but he sent benefits to the moon with massive % increases each year.

DB, what is your opinion of the way UC is (or not) being rolled out now. Is it coping with families now, or still concentrating on single people.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GinAndPlatonic said:

DB, what is your opinion of the way UC is (or not) being rolled out now. Is it coping with families now, or still concentrating on single people.?

Single people.No tax credit claims have been moved over yet as far as i know.UC is more generous than tax credits for couples,slightly less generous for single parents.Where it is tighter is they expect you to work 35 hours,but you can claim with 1 hour.Question is will they ever force people onto job search etc who are working 16 hours?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, durhamborn said:

Single people.No tax credit claims have been moved over yet as far as i know.UC is more generous than tax credits for couples,slightly less generous for single parents.Where it is tighter is they expect you to work 35 hours,but you can claim with 1 hour.Question is will they ever force people onto job search etc who are working 16 hours?.

It is said now that it will be 2022 before its all finally rolled out. If they are not putting new claimant families onto UC then surely it is dead before it starts.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.mirror.co.uk/money/it-wasnt-planned-very-wanted-12480380

 

Read this story today, what a crock of shit. So basically because people are only just now ‘discovering’ about the two child limit, it’s apparently causing abortions and child poverty. Despite the fact that Tax/Universal credits and benefits for two children equates to a £35k salary. There are lots of working financially sensible people would love a child but aren’t in position/not able to.

It makes things even worse when the religious organisations are putting in their oars too for the restriction to be scrapped. It’s one of the only positive regulations that has been implemented so far.

Edited by sideysid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, sideysid said:

https://www.mirror.co.uk/money/it-wasnt-planned-very-wanted-12480380

 

Read this story today, what a crock of shit. So basically because people are only just now ‘discovering’ about the two child limit, it’s apparently causing abortions and child poverty. Despite the fact that Tax/Universal credits and benefits for two children equates to a £35k salary. There are lots of working financially sensible people would love a child but aren’t in position/not able to.

It makes things even worse when the religious organisations are putting in their oars too for the restriction to be scrapped. It’s one of the only positive regulations that has been implemented so far.

Its got it all.She doesnt live with partner as they "cant afford to".She was on the sick for 12 years with some made up dodgy  illness but is now found as fit for work.He doesnt work but is training to be a personal trainer.In other words he spends most of the time at the gym.So far she will of had about a third of a million in benefits,and another £150k before the two children are 18,but she wants more.

Iv been in that situation many years ago,i worked in a factory and did all the overtime i could get.I didnt expect someone else to do it while i went to the gym.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   296 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.