MIF & Carers element.

Hi,

UC Claimant is self employed, sole trader. Their wife has enhanced rate ADP. Carers element is applied to the claim for Claimant caring foe their wife.

MiF has been added to their statement. I was under the belief that when they have the Carers element MIF doesn’t apply.

Could anyone clarify and point me in the direction of a reliable source to quote from on their journal when raising this.

Thanks.

You are correct.

The relevant legislation is Reg. 62(1)(b) of the UC Regulations.

The guidance for this can be found at para. H4060.

In practice, I believe DWP apply this rule by removing the “gainfully self-employed” status from such claimants (although legally such claimants can technically be gainfully self-employed). See the guidance linked to below in the section headed “Claimants not required to attend a Gateway Interview”.

https://data.parliament.uk/DepositedPapers/Files/DEP2024-0442/150._Self-employed_and_Gainfully_self-employed_V16.0.pdf

Thanks for the quick response Charles.

I had thought I was correct.

Is it the work coaches job to turn off work commitments?

Claimant had a self employed work coach but their last meeting was last month when the start up period ended. Client was never made aware of MIF at any point, and there has been errors with their claim down to lack of knowledge and understanding of the SE work coach.

Thanks

Should have added - client wasn’t getting the CE at the start of their joint claim as wife hadn’t had their decision. The CE was backdated to oct 23, so at start of claim they did have work comittments but their work coach hasn’t updated this even thought they did a COC for caring!

I’ve no idea how the DWP describe what they should do in these circumstances, but filling out Charles’ references to the legislation takes you to s.19(2)(b) of the WRA 2012 (no work-related requirements can be imposed on a claimant who has regular and substantial caring responsibilities for a severely disabled person). Someone who qualifies for the CE by definition falls within s.19(2)(b) and that is why the condition in reg.62(1)(b) for application of the MIF to that person is not met. There’s then no point in investigating whether the person would be said to be in gainful self-employment.