Forum Home → Discussion → Universal credit migration → Thread
Defeat for govt in High Court in TP & AR
Written answer from Minister for Disabled People Justin Tomlinson says that -
‘As at 13 February 2020, the Department has spent £215,846.89 on legal costs defending and appealing the cases in relation to people formerly in receipt of Severe Disability premium that have transferred to Universal Credit. These figures include Government Legal Department litigation fees, counsel’s fees and other disbursements, as well as VAT where payable.’
Another ruling (the fourth) in favour of TP and AR:
In a scathing judgment handed down today, the DWP is found to have discriminated against the pair when it didn’t compensate them the full circa £180 a month difference in the payments they received on legacy benefits and the payments they received on UC when they moved into an area where UC had already been rolled out.
According to the DWP, in evidence it gave to the court when defending the judicial review claim, the ruling will affect up to 50,000 people and will involve sums of up to £150 million over a six-year period to put right.
Rightsnet has heard that DWP have applied for permission to appeal…
Disappointing
DWP have today legislated in response to this judgment.
The explanatory memo says -
These amendments to the Universal Credit (Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2014 make provision to introduce additional amounts for claimants who:
- are entitled to a transitional severe disability premium (tSDPe) (or a transitional SDP amount) in UC and
- were previously entitled in the month preceding their claim to Universal Credit (UC) and continue to satisfy the eligibility conditions up to and including the first day of their UC award, to one or more of the following:
o enhanced disability premium (EDP)
o disability premium (DP)
o disabled child premium (DCP) or the disabled child element (DCE) and are now receiving the lower rate disabled
child addition (DCA) inUniversal Credit (UC).
Thanks for sharing Daphne.
DWP have today legislated in response to this judgment.
The explanatory memo says -
These amendments to the Universal Credit (Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2014 make provision to introduce additional amounts for claimants who:
- are entitled to a transitional severe disability premium (tSDPe) (or a transitional SDP amount) in UC and
- were previously entitled in the month preceding their claim to Universal Credit (UC) and continue to satisfy the eligibility conditions up to and including the first day of their UC award, to one or more of the following:
o enhanced disability premium (EDP)
o disability premium (DP)
o disabled child premium (DCP) or the disabled child element (DCE) and are now receiving the lower rate disabled
child addition (DCA) inUniversal Credit (UC).
Have I misunderstood or misread this or does it exclude all those who have already migrated including the original plaintiffs?
The Explanatory Memorandum says that, but the actual Regs say that it would apply to anyone, but they would only get the extra money from the first AP beginning on or after 14th Feb 2024.
The Explanatory Memorandum says that, but the actual Regs say that it would apply to anyone, but they would only get the extra money from the first AP beginning on or after 14th Feb 2024.
Thanks Charles. Is that within the spirit of the judgment?
So the additional funds will be paid, but only from February 2024. Nothing to be paid in respect of the two years during which the DWP has sat on the court’s January 2022 decision, or for any period prior to that decision.
Mistake, deleted.
[ Edited: 23 Nov 2023 at 01:25 am by Charles ]Look at Paragraph 3
(b)if the transitional SDP element or, as the case may be, the transitional SDP amount, has been reduced to nil by virtue of regulation 55, the additional amount is to be treated as if it were the initial amount of a transitional element calculated under regulation 55(1).
So if you had a TSDPE and it has already been eroded to nil, you now get the new TSDPE which will be made up of one or more of the new additional amounts, and now this will gradually erode away, conveniently starting when the April 24 uprating takes effect?
So the people affected years ago (I think TP & AR case started in 2016 or 2017) instead of having it for a past period with a complicated calculation of erosion that would have occurred, just get it in February and experience the erosion afresh in future?
Am I reading this right?
What if you are no longer on UC, eg now pension age or other income takes you over - any compensation for the past period of loss?
Yes that’s right Sarah. Anyone no longer on UC wouldn’t qualify for the payments.
What if you are no longer on UC, eg now pension age or other income takes you over - any compensation for the past period of loss?
It seems they have taken the narrowest possible approach to embodying the judgement in law. Might there be further legal challenges?