Forum Home → Discussion → Universal credit administration → Thread
UC and SDP
Forgive my ignorance here but can anyone confirm that the Severe Disability premium does not exist in any form under UC (apart from CTR)
This will leave so many disabled people £55 a week worse off, and im shocked that they may have brought this in without people noticing.
Im also shocked that ive just heard about it.
Thanks
Yep, there will be no SDP, no EDP. There will be a two-level adult disability addition but this will be decided not upon receipt of DLA or PIP but on the Work Capability Assessment, which has been cut-and-pasted wholesale in to the UC system.
The lower rate of the disability element/addition, whatever they’re calling the wretched thing is about £29 a week, so fights shy of current DP.
The higher rate is about £70 per week, so it sits somewhere above SDP but won’t match combined DP/SDP/EDP as far as I can see.
HMG’s take on this, and the rather low allowances for disabled children, is that UC work allowances are generous, so people can go to work. There seems to be no concept that some people simply cannot.
Not to mention the other cheat, that a disabled person who is also a carer cannot claim additions for both under UC.
Severe Disability premium does not exist in any form under UC.
Here are more details: Holes in the safety net, an inquiry in 2012 led by Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson and supported by Disability Rights UK, The Children’s Society and Citizens Advice found that about 450,000 disabled people and their families will be worse off under UC. This is largely due to cuts to the child disability additions and to the severe disability premium.
The inquiry report, ‘Holes in the safety net: The impact of Universal Credit on disabled people and their families’ found that:
• up to 230,000 severely disabled people who do not have another adult to assist them will get between £28 and £58 less in support every week
• 100,000 disabled children stand to lose up to £28 a week
• 116,000 disabled people who work will be at risk of losing up to £40 per week from help towards additional costs of being disabled
As far as I can gather, two severely disabled claimants who live as a couple (ie both support group claimants) will potentially get less money than a couple in which there is one severely disabled claimant (in support group) and their able bodied carer, despite the fact that couple 1 are more likely to be in greater financial need.
Couple 1 would get £303.77 in recognition of their disabilities
Couple 2 would get £303.77 in recognition of the disabled person plus £123.62 in recognition of the carerIt’s daft, assuming I have the right end of the stick.
Yesss - because the disability element is tied to WCA and not receipt of DLA/PIP, there can only be one higher disability element award and so if one qualified for the carer element, it’s an additional payment. And as for those who’d get double SDP double carer plus EDP under the current regime, I think there’s something like a £100 per week loss on UC.
Cunning tactic on the WCA….I’m just thinking through what nasties would be visited on the claimants and whether or not said nasties would be worth the risk…
UC regs - Medical examinations
44.—(1) Where it falls to be determined whether a claimant has limited capability for work or for work and work-related activity, the claimant may be called by or on behalf of a health care professional approved by the Secretary of State to attend a medical examination.
(2) Where a claimant who is called by or on behalf of such a health care professional to attend a medical examination fails without a good reason to attend or submit to the examination, the claimant is to be treated as not having limited capability for work or, as the case may be, for work and work-related activity.
(3) But paragraph (2) does not apply unless—
(a)notice of the date, time and place of the examination was given to the claimant at least 7 days in advance; or .
(b)notice was given less than 7 days in advance and the claimant agreed to accept it.
.......so….yes??
I don’t think there is anything to stop the carer addition being awarded in either of Jol’s cases - there is no need for one member of a couple to contrive an exit from the support group. If they are genuinely caring for the other member of the couple, they will get the element irrespective of their own work capability status. What the UC Regs do prevent is the mutual double premiums allowed under the legacy schemes: you cannot get 2 x the support component plus 2 x the carer component, you can only get one of each. This is achieved by making the carer and support elements overlap in respect of the same person. See Reg 29(4)(a)
[ Edited: 20 Aug 2013 at 04:12 pm by HB Anorak ]The problem with reg 29(4) is that it assumes that any LCW (or LCWRA) element has been included in the award in respect of a particular claimant.
Suppose you have a couple (A and B) where both have LCW and one cares for the other.
Reg 27 gives us just one LCW element but it doesn’t tell who it’s been awarded in respect of.
Is that single LCW element awarded in respect of A or B or or both of them?
If you take the worst case interpretation (that it’s in respect of both claimants) then no carer element would be payable. In that case Jol’s suggestion makes perfect sense.
If it’s awarded in respect of just one of A or B then you’d want to make sure the LCW element is awarded in respect of the non-carer partner - but who decides this (the regs are silent)?
The ADM doesn’t shed any light on this but hopefully it will be fixed before anyone is actually affected.
The problem with reg 29(4) is that it assumes that any LCW (or LCWRA) element has been included in the award in respect of a particular claimant.
Suppose you have a couple (A and B) where both have LCW and one cares for the other.
Reg 27 gives us just one LCW element but it doesn’t tell who it’s been awarded in respect of.
Is that single LCW element awarded in respect of A or B or or both of them?
If you take the worst case interpretation (that it’s in respect of both claimants) then no carer element would be payable. In that case Jol’s suggestion makes perfect sense.
If it’s awarded in respect of just one of A or B then you’d want to make sure the LCW element is awarded in respect of the non-carer partner - but who decides this (the regs are silent)?
The ADM doesn’t shed any light on this but hopefully it will be fixed before anyone is actually affected.
anyone know if there have been any updates on this situation?
I remember getting my head around this at the start of 2013. I was surprised at how the disability “premia” were being deleted from UC.
To clarify, I believe that you get the higher of two overlapping premia, e.g. the LCW and carer elements.
From CPAG’s UC training booklet from April 13, “A carer’s element of £144.70 is paid if a claimant satisfies the conditions for carer’s allowance, disregarding the earnings rule. Only one element can be paid for each severely disabled person. Couples can qualify for two elements if both partners satisfy the conditions. A claimant cannot qualify for a LCW/LCWRA element and a carer’s element at the same time (only the highest is payable).”
This is suggestive of premia being connected to individuals, not claims.
Presumably, the CA unit will also need to know, so they notify issue an appropriate award when someone is refused CA on earnings only. I have a concern that JCP will contact the CA unit to ask if CA entitlement exists and will simply be told “no”.
Presumably, the CA unit will also need to know, so they notify issue an appropriate award when someone is refused CA on earnings only. I have a concern that JCP will contact the CA unit to ask if CA entitlement exists and will simply be told “no”.
No, there is no need to have made a claim for CA at all to qualify for the carer element (UC Reg 30(2)).
Jon
Thanks Jon. That then being the case, JCP makes the decisions? How curious.