Universal Credit and Earnings – What’s in a month
by Gareth Morgan on January 11, 2019
While we don’t know what the government’s response will be, The High Court has dealt a major blow to the Universal Credit system today (11th January 2019) in a Judicial Review case brought by CPAG.
They’ve decided UC is wrong in taking all pay received in an assessment period into account as income for that period.
“68.
On a proper interpretation of regulation 54 of the 2013 Regulations, read in context, the amount of the earned income of a claimant in respect of an assessment period is to be based on, but will not necessarily be the same as, the amount of earned income actually received in that assessment period. There will need to be an adjustment where, as in the present case, the claimants actually received two months’ salary in one assessment period but the combined salaries do not, in fact, constitute earned income in respect of the period of time included in that assessment period. The defendant, therefore, erred in treating the combined salary for those two months’ as earned income in respect of that assessment period for the purposes of calculating the amount of universal credit payable.”
More, no doubt, later
Comments
That’s interesting. Did the judge just decide it on the basis of interpreting the words or irrationality and not bother with the discrimination argument? How much more difficult does it make the automation of the whole business if they have to look beyond the date the money was paid?
Solely on the basis of the interpretation of the regulation dealing with when earnings should be used. As to their difficulties, see my next post.
This is only part of the story. People on Universal Credit must forfeit 60% of anything they earn with temporary or one off shifts. They actually put this over as a positive.
That’s the normal 63% taper of earnings.