Many amendments have been tabled for the third reading of the Universal Credit and Personal independence Payment Bill.  There are now 18 pages of detailed amendments,  some on behalf of the government and some on behalf of those opposing the bill.

Below are a selection of the amendments. 

4-point rule

Government amendment (Gov 4) removes clause 5 – the PIP 4 point rule – from the bill.  If this is accepted (which it will be) it will be the end of the 4-point rule, unless it is resurrected in the Timms review which seems unlikely.

UC freeze

A new clause put forward by the government (Gov NC1) provides for the freeze to the universal health element not to apply to existing claimant, people who meet the severe conditions criteria and terminally ill patients.  This was one of the government’s earlier concessions to the rebels.

Name

Even the name of the bill is now subject to a government amendment (Gov 5), which would remove the words “and personal independence payment” from the title of the bill.  If the amendment passes, the bill will be the Universal Credit Bill.

Severe conditions criteria

Labour MP Graeme Downie has tabled an amendment (17) which relates to an issue that Benefits and Work has been highlighting.  The severe conditions criteria (SCC) as currently written require claimants to prove they meet the SCC “constantly”

Constantly is defined in the Bill as “at all times” or “on all occasions on which the claimant undertakes or attempts to undertake the activity”.

However, many degenerative conditions such as Parkinson’s, multiple sclerosis and muscular dystrophy follow a slow path of decreasing ability, with periods of remission.  

At present, the bill would prevent people in these circumstances getting the higher payments and freedom from reassessment that the SCC provide, long after it is certain they will never work again.

The amendment would allow for the SCC to apply to claimants who have fluctuating conditions, such as Parkinson’s or multiple sclerosis.

Private doctors

An amendment (33) by SNP MP Kirsty Blackman, removes the requirement that, for the severe conditions criteria (SCC), a diagnosis must have been made by a health professional providing NHS services.  Many people are forced to resort to a private diagnosis because the NHS waiting list for an assessment for their condition is years long.  As the bill stands, having a private diagnosis only, appears to bar claimants from the SCC.

Date of UC cuts

An amendment (19) brought forward by work and pensions committee chair Debbie Abrahams, changes the date on which the universal credit cuts start, from April 2026 to November 2026.

More reports

A proposed new clause by LibDem MP Steve Darling would prevent most of the Bill coming into force until a range of reports and consultations had been completed.

What happens next

In a likely chaotic session on 9 July, these amendments – or as many as there are time for -will be considered by a committee of the whole House and voted on before a final vote on the whole bill, as amended, takes place.

The Speaker will make a decision on whether the Bill will be certified as a money bill only after all the amendments that are agreed have been included in the bill and it is now in its final form.

If it passes the commons, the bill will then be sent to the House of Lords. However, if it is certified asa money bill then the Lords will have no power to oblige the Commons to consider any amendments they suggest and the bill will automatically become law after a month.

You can download the latest amendments from a link on this page.

Comments

Write comments...
or post as a guest
People in conversation:
Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 days ago
    Most of this we already know – but interesting re contacting the spokespeople, and the opportunity to give evidence. Any thoughts who the spokespeople might be?

    Share your views on a proposed new law

    Contacting your MP about a bill
    You can let your MP know if you would like them to support or oppose a particular bill or ask to meet with them so that you can put your case. You can also contact your MP if you would like them to support an amendment.

    If your MP does not feel able to help and there is a specific point that you feel should be discussed you could contact one of the main party spokespeople on the bill to check whether they intend to raise it.

    Oral Evidence sessions
    Some public bill committees begin by inviting ministers or other officials to talk to them in person about the bill. They may also invite lobby groups, organisations or individuals with a particular interest in the subject to give their views in this way. If you think you or your organisation should be invited, you can contact the departmental officials responsible for the bill.

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 9 days ago
      @HL I never hear back from my MP - couldn't care Clare (Coutinho) we call her locally. I contacted her about the PIP bill and never heard back. Have contacted her about local issues but never hear back. I do wonder what their actual use is!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @Anon25 I think they have to - it’s what they sign up for.
      Doesn’t mean they necessarily agree.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @HL Who are the main party spokespeople?  I messaged my MP over 4 weeks ago.  I have sent several emails.  No response.  He did sign the original amendment and help to negotiate a concession but voted for bill.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 days ago
    Maybe time to start a petition for Rachel Reeves to go. She has got away this - and they will think twice (Mr Timms) - about balancing the books on the disabled again. Reeves wasnt soft on welfare well we arent soft on incomptience 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 days ago
    From DPAC


    Our letter raised serious concerns with the quality and fairness of the so-called “consultation” being carried out on disability benefit cuts. We asked for the consultation to be extended, and for urgent action to address the failings.

    Stephen Timm’s reply, available here, does not address any of the concerns, and he refuses to extend the consultation process.



    DPAC response :

    We are concerned you still do not understand the failures of your department. We have had no indication from you, or the DWP, whatsoever, in any statement, that you understand that the consultation was organised in a way that was unsuitable for disabled people.


    I personally have absolute no confidence in Stephen Timms upcoming review and sincerely hope the Disabled Charities/groups don't either and ask him to resign the post.

    I also hope that the disability/groups ensure he's not replaced with another Starmer yes person

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 days ago
    Is it worth ringing if my mp surgery is a voicemail?  I wrote two emails (which were ignored) but am normally too ill to do that, as my disability is affected by even brief screen time.  
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @Radionoush You tried and I'm sure you made a point about these cuts. Think everyone has been there with answering machines it happens.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @Dee I’m so disappointed in myself :(
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @MariW Me too.  In my first of two emails I even mentioned that I worked for the Fabian Society prior to becoming too ill to work.  I mentioned that to try to demonstrate just how bad things must be for me to feel I could never vote Labour again.  Still got not reply.   
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @Dee I rang and left a message but I think I made a complete mess of it.  I have huge anxiety around ‘phone calls and ran out of time so had to ring back again to complete my message.  I don’t think I’ll have conveyed anything I wanted to say.  Which is why I wish they’d have someone answering calls so you could actually have a conversation.  I didn’t even remember to say that I could vote for Labour again if she voted this through, but perhaps that’s for the best as I tried to adopt a tone of sadness and disappointment in her vote as opposed to fury so as not to get her back up.  
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @MariW Me too
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 days ago
    The dust has settled down a bit after the voting in Parliament and the PM has recently had an interview on TV with the BBC (The very corporation that protected the likes of the Jimmy Savile in the past and we all know who was the head of CPS at the time) to express his concerns to the viewers and the voters who voted him in office a year ago, saying that things have been difficult and some have achieved results when in government.  

    My concern now is that; has this been staged on television for the PM on his behalf to show how difficult things can be in politics and for his Labour Government. 
    If so, it looks like he going the very hard way about it with his party and listening to them and having to make U-turns on some of his commitments is again making people suffer and baffled of where this country is going. He says this is broken that’s broken and this needs to be reformed and if that’s the case what the hell is the point making plans for the country when you are having to face u-turn after u-turn and losing BILLIONS of tax payers money for being incompetent (The only thing that needs to reform is the PM himself).

    My clear message to the rebels in Parliament is to keep fighting for us, you are our shining light of hope and despair to make a huge change in a direction for a fairness esteem for the people who are standing up to this Government’s thoughtless (without any compassion for today’s vulnerable society) idea of attacking the vulnerable in today’s society because in next voting next week I truly believe it’s a Block in future Case Laws period..

    BTW news for all press tabloids put this in your pipes and smoke it…

    Love you All…
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 days ago
    The Sunday papers/online news contain the latest round of disabled bashing…how due to welfare u-turn, we are therefore to blame for more difficult decisions to come. But fear not, all levers are being explored(apart from the obvious one, higher taxation for wealthy corporations and high net worth individuals.) Today I’m doing a Rachel (crying) that none of them have so far resigned after a disastrous twelve months.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @(No) hope Can’t remember exactly which day it was, but Mailonline had a front page headline along lines of How Many PIP Claimants Live in YOUR Area?  With an interactive and very detailed map showing where there were PIP claimants.  I complained to IPSO.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 days ago
    A useful link with a template if you wish to write again to your MP about the amendments - you can add your own comments of course 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    Try to avoid reading those rags. Cant trust press since the hacking scandal. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    In case it’s helpful -

    Can I contact other MPs?

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @Dee Hi Dee,
      That’s good to know.
      Which APPG is the one to contact for this bill?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @Cuckoo21 If you mention you're contacting an MP who is in a APPG I think you can get around that issue. I've been doing it only heard back from one of them so far.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @HL I don't know.  You can contact other MPs on social media.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @Cuckoo21 You may need to prove you are a constituent 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @HL I think it has to be the MP for your area specifically. I contacted another MP in my town after I'd voted for my local MP and received a reply to say that I needed to be in her constituency.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    UC & P UC & PIP BILL 2025 (draft) Points to note: 5.4.(a). to make different provision for different cases or purposes (b) to provide for a person to exercise a discretion in dealing with any matter These may seem innocuous, but basically this blocks decisions made being used as Case Law.
    @ANGELA – Any updates?

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @ANGELA Hi Angela,
      That’s great news – 
      and thank you for getting back to me.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @HL Hi HL. 
      They are removing Clause 5 entirely (all the PIP stuff). 
       So this should be scrubbed. ✊🏻
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    With articles such as these appearing in the press it gives genuine disabled & chronically ill claimants a bad name, as if we are milking the system when we all know how difficult it is to get an award and the amount of effort involved in the whole pip process not to mention the impact on each of us in terms of our mental health while going through the assessment and reassessments.

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Boo DOes it help sharing articles like this from the news?  Or does it make people more distressed and upset by all of this?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Boo I’ve been trolled on bluesky by alleged ‘liberals’. It’s made me poorly tbh. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @Boo
      Standard fare for the Daily Mail. If we had a properly functioning system of press regulation which prevented these papers from lying and misleading with impunity this would be a far better country. Unfortunately we don't, so it's not.

      You'll find similar right wing slop plastered all over YouTube. "Preston Journalist" is one of them and he comes across as a really nasty piece of work. Definitely one to avoid. 

      That said, the polling suggests that majority opinion is against disability cuts, so the propaganda from the likes of the Mail obviously isn't proving to be as effective as it used to.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @The Dogmother Well said the dogmother 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    We are being spoilt with another article in today’s guardian (5.07.2025) entitled 
    “We promised change but people aren’t feeling it yet’: Labour rues poor first year”
     
    An extract from the article, “
    especially if they are already saying hard choices are to be made in the autumn budget because of the 5 billion pound black hole in balancing the chancellor’s budget.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 21 days ago
    I’m getting really fed up with government ministers, saying that the fallout from welfare reforms is “damaging” and have declined to rule out tax rises in the autumn.

    Disabled and chronic sick claimants who have lifelong illnesses are sick to the back teeth with ministers who failed to understand the damage and harms especially increased anxiety they have caused with their pip & UC reforms, where they have little regard to the harms the welfare reform bill would have caused if you lost pip entitlement, especially with the 4 point rule they had wanted to introduce, throwing disabled claimants into poverty with the loss of carers allowance as well as other passported benefits.

    This rhetoric is going to further exacerbate the stigma we are suffering by some of those who pay taxes who are having these messages reinforced that any tax rises will be the fault of pip benefit claimants and some commentators are also spouting the same rhetoric.

    We are no longer a compassionate nation!!

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @MJ Fault! Doh.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @Boo Aww, but you must see that it's harder for people to lose £250 a year in extra tax than it is for a disabled person to lose £9000?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @Boo Well they can seem to find the money for big public sector and doctor's pay rises and other things I can't mention but tax rises will be all our thought. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @Boo They fail to include that many disabled people have paid taxes. Those who have never paid taxes 
      Because of disability have never used many services that others use but are likely paying other bills like council tax. Disabled people are some of the poorest people in the country and deserve respect kindness and to live without fear. They would also waste far less of their money if they listened to disabled people for once they find it worked for the benefit of all. But they have to stip treating everyone like shirkers liars idiots to be treated like muck. This hash discipline it’s good for you rubbish doesn’t work.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @Boo Effectively telling hard working tax payers they are going to have to pay higher taxes because too many people are taking the mickey claiming benefits, and benefits are so generous disabled people live comfortable lives on more than full time workers and get free BMWs and have no need to work when many could. Does not just increase stigma. It increases hate crime.

      And alarmingly if a violent crime against a person is classed as a hate crime against a disabled person it is 5x less likely to be referred to the CPS by the police than the same offense not classed as a hate crime. Which points to either hate crimes being committed by random strangers the police fail to find, or the police opting to have a stern word with people who hit disabled people rather than referring the case to the CPS.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 21 days ago
    Constantly is defined in the Bill as “at all times” or “on all occasions on which the claimant undertakes or attempts to undertake the activity”.

    There is case law showing that patients with certain distinct types of advanced diseases, whom can mobilise, or who can undertake an activity, but not on the majority of occasions, do still meet the criteria to be in the LCWRA groups, so the DWP know it would be easier to prove 'fraud' if they completely discounted the symptoms. And I suspect that idea is being driven by surveillance data they have compiled by nefarious means. This is a government crossing a line. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 21 days ago
    With the government dropping the 4 point rule now. It wouldn’t surprise me if the timms review on pip when published will be constantly rather than majority of times now like they doing the u/c severe group. Just another way of cutting costs and harming the disabled people 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 21 days ago
    The big flight here is going to be the Timms review. This is were they are going to make the cuts but it will be dressed up very differently than the 4 points disaster.

    Write to your MPs with the following 

    "

    I am writing in relation to the ongoing Timms Review of Personal Independence Payment (PIP). As a concerned constituent/disability rights advocate I urge you to ensure that current PIP claimants who have already been reassessed under the DLA-to-PIP process are not subjected to another round of reassessments as part of this review.

    Many disabled people endured great distress, uncertainty, and in some cases, loss of essential support during the original transition from DLA to PIP. Forcing individuals to go through this again would be retraumatising and wholly unjust.

    I ask that you raise this issue within Parliament and call on the Government and the review team to implement safeguards that protect existing claimants from unnecessary reassessment, particularly those who have already undergone this difficult transition.

    Thank you for your ongoing commitment to social justice and the rights of disabled people. I hope you will stand with us in ensuring the review does not repeat the harms of the past"

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @Broken Britain Timms is the wrong person for review. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @tintack Yes it will be interesting to see which groups they use, bet it will be groups who are heavily funding by Government and will indeed roll over 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @Broken Britain
      As things stand, the Timms review will also try to make receipt of PIP daily living the qualifying criteria for the UC health element, which would be utterly catastrophic for the 600,000 of us who currently get UC health but not PIP daily living. That needs to be fought bloody hard as well.

      The main concern with the Timms review is exactly which disability groups will take part in the "co-production". It's essential that whoever they are, they don't roll over and let the government get away with anything really damaging. That would be a disaster, because it would allow the government to say "well, we worked on this with disability groups and they signed off on it", even if many other groups opposed it. Whichever groups take part in this process need to be able to say no and walk away if necessary. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 21 days ago
    Re: SCC. It scares me! It's not just fluctuating conditions but progressive conditions overall. My concern is jobs that are actively detrimental to one's health, speeding up disability to the point of total dependency and reduced quality of life, that then requires substantially more state resources to support over the long term than someone who is recognised as at risk for this and protected from ever reaching this point. 

    The SCC in it's current form seems to require one to have completely exhausted all possibility of work to the exclusion of being able to maintain basic daily living needs. I don't think this is in anyone's interest, be it disabled person, friends/family, or state?

    While jobs can be beneficial in some circumstances, they can also be harmful in others. The SCC seems harshly black and white. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 21 days ago
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jul/04/rachel-reeves-tax-rises-damaging-week-tears-labour

    Reading between the lines reeves as good as confirmed that the timms review is most likely plan b to cut billions off disability benefits (esp pip)

    This whole episode seems to be just an inconvenient blip to her plans which do not sound like they’ve changed

    Starmer doesn’t seem to have much interest in the home front of being pm (he seems to only be interested in foreign affairs - would of made a good foreign security but is not in the uk enough, not often available to meet with his mp, and has lowest voting records in his first year compared to any other pm in recent years)

    I’ve read a lot of insider accounts of this gov by several journalists and what’s made clear is that reeves and Morgan mcsweeney are the ones running the show (country) in terms of home policy and starmer goes along with their recommendations.

    Mcsweeney believes that lowing the welfare bill via disability cuts (painting disabled as taking the mickey) to attract back voters swinging towards reform……..and well we all know reeves is the new Labour multiverse version of a Disney villain (we’ve all seen the memes of Kendall of cruella de vil - reeves is probably most like maleficent? - suggests below on timms alter ego)
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Slb Would you really put it past this lot to try to get it through as secondary legislation even if what they propose should really be subjected to the sort of scrutiny that comes with primary legislation? I wouldn't. Look at how they're trying to get the UC/PIP bill rammed through at breakneck speed to minimise scrutiny. They have tried to evade scrutiny at every turn already. I'm not saying we need to go hell for leather at it at this stage, just flag it up so MPs are aware of what might be coming down the track.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @tintack No we shouldn't.  It's only primary legislation if it falls into that category.  As yet we don't know if does, so all we'll achieve is a lot of work for ourselves with absolutely nothing to gain from it.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @SLB
      "At the moment we don't know what is going to be recommended, and so we can't pressure people to do it through primary legislation."

      The only way it doesn't matter if it's done through primary or secondary legislation is if the review only proposes very minor, insignificant changes. That does not seem very likely, to say the least. 

      I'm not saying we should be sending MPs half a dozen e-mails a day - there is a balance to be struck. But I don't think it's unreasonable to flag up this issue now while  the government is in a very weak position, particularly as they are already showing their determination to avoid scrutiny with the current bill.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @tintack I disagree.  If we start work now on something that isn't going to happen for eighteen months, we're all going to go stark raving bonkers.  At the moment we don't know what is going to be recommended, and so we can't pressure people to do it through primary legislation.  For that, you need to know what's coming.  We don't.  

      Have a break.  Enjoy life for the next year.  There is plenty of time for fighting when we know what we're fighting for and against.  All of our worries prior to March of this year about what might or might not happen didn't really help us in the fight that followed - they just ruined our lives for months.  

      We do need to regroup a couple of months before the Timms report ends, to see if we can get the various disabled groups to work together in a way that didn't quite happen this time around - for example, one stonking great petition with a million signatures instead of dozens of them with 10,000.  And there will no doubt be things to fight for when we see the bill that will bring in the death of the WCA.  But that isn't yet.  We need to go away and relax and chill as best we can and enjoy what we have earned ovre the last three months. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @Slb
      "We can't encourage MPs to vote against something when we don't know even the basics ourselves."

      But we can, and should, encourage them now to pressure the government for a committment to present whatever comes out of the Timms review in primary legislation, so that it's subjected to proper scrutiny, debate, amendments and a vote. It's better to start applying that pressure now, at the start of the process, rather than risk leaving it until late in the day - partly so Labour MPs are aware at an early stage what the government might be planning to avoid proper scrutiny, thus giving them time to pressure the government themselves, and partly because the government has been badly damaged on this issue and is now in a weak position with its backbenchers because of that. 

      We may also need to apply similar pressure to whichever disability groups take part in this "co-production". These groups need to be people who have the backbone to stand up to the government and walk away if necessary. I don't know if any details have yet been given on how it will be decided who takes part, but if it's a case of the government picking and choosing groups who will just rubber stamp whatever the government was planning to do anyway, so that they could say "well disability groups have signed off on this", that would be a disaster. 


  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 21 days ago
    Do the severe fluctuating conditions include epilepsy? I'm currently in the support group, but have to fight like hell because when people look at me I'm fine, they dont see what i go through. I've uncontrolled epilepsy.  No warning. Sometimes it's fine then it's not. I take several types of seizures. People are very uneducated 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Lishy1 I have this very problem.  I have a severe form of what is classed by medics as the most painful condition known to man and am one of only six people in the country to have it as badly as I do.  If I’m well enough to be assessed to ignorant eyes I look well enough to work even though I am not normally even well to get out of bed.  I was told at my last PIP appeal that I didn’t look ill, but won the appeal.  Now I’m even iller.  My condition changes throughout the day, suddenly and unpredictably,  there’s no way I’d meet rules that are specifically drawn up to exclude. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 21 days ago
    Are they trying to scrap any of the premiums in UC that people received on ESA in the LCWRA group? I just can't work out what is going on at all. It's just getting more confusing. The whole thing should be scrapped. Then start from scratch and do it again properly.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @john Even though it isn't exactly a reassessment It It certainly feels like one with all the documentation required and questions that need answering. 

      Callous indifference to the pain and stress it causes, perhaps in fact cruelty in that it might be deliberate in order to put people off through the pain and stressful hassle of it.  

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @Judyteen1960 Transferring from ESA to UC does not trigger a reassessment. Your ESA LCWRA status will be transferred to UC LCWRA status.

      When you are transferred from ESA to UC you get transitional protection if your ESA + LCWRA premium + SDP premium + Housing Benefit is more than UC + LCWRA premium + UC housing element. Your UC is increased so it is equal to the higher legacy amount . Your UC is then frozen at that amount until your eligible amount under the normal UC system exceeds you transitional protected legacy amount.

      Note that this mean you do not get any uprating so your benefit total so it is eroded by inflation until the eligible amount under normal UC catches up. And as housing is included if your rent goes up and with it your UC housing element under the normal UC system, then the amount you receive after rent in cash terms goes down. Transitional protection does not protect what you received after rent, it protects your total legacy entitlement including rent.

      Also note it is a postcode lottery as far as Council Tax reduction so moving from ESA o UC may cause your council tax reduction to be reduced, and you getting a higher council tax bill to pay.

      And also note housing benefit is paid two week or four weekly in arrears often directly to the landlord. While UC is paid colander monthly in arrears by default to the claimant, and the first payment takes 5 weeks. So the transition is likely to cause a gap that will cause a bit of rent arrears.

      And finally there are some differences between housing benefit and UC housing element. For example for housing benefit social housing tenants local authorities had discretion to give an extra room exemption to the under occupation penalty to disabled people not on PIP/DLA. The do not have that discretion with UC housing element. There are probably other differences that effect people in specific circumstances.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 21 days ago
      @Cuckoo21 As it stands, those who are in the esa support group who claim severe disability premium will not be getting the severe disability premium payment. So that's £89 per week less. They will or rather pay  traditional payments for I believe 12 months. ( I could be slightly off as to how long) . But the new site of the proposed ammendments doesn't really make sense to me as yet . I'm waiting to transition from esa to uc and am dreading it. If I don't get into the lwcra group , I don't know how I'll cope, as I'll be expected to work , which I absolutely cannot. So let's wait to see what happens on July 9. Hope this helped.

Free PIP, ESA & UC Updates!

Delivered Fortnightly

Over 110,000 claimants and professionals subscribe to the UK's leading source of benefits news.

 
iContact
We use cookies

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential for the operation of the site, while others help us to improve this site and the user experience (tracking cookies). You can decide for yourself whether you want to allow cookies or not. Please note that if you reject them, you may not be able to use all the functionalities of the site.