Ten years since the benefit cap was introduced across Britain, new research shows families affected by the policy have as little as £44 a week to live on after they’ve paid housing costs.
This research study examines the extent to which universal credit adheres to the rule of law principles of transparency, procedural fairness and lawfulness.
Digital aspects of universal credit (UC) routinely lead to wrong amounts being awarded to claimants – often the most vulnerable - and to breaches of rule-of-law principles, new Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) research finds.
The DWP’s research during the discovery phase of managed migration to universal credit (UC) concluded that ‘on the whole households are able to make the move to UC.’ But we are finding that, when issues do arise, the consequences can be serious for claimants causing stress, budgeting difficulties and debt.
Just over a third (34%) of people on universal credit who are subject to the benefit cap – which the Government claims incentivises work – are assessed by the DWP as not required to look for a job because they are caring for very young children, new FOI data for Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) shows. A further 18% are already in work but don’t earn enough to reach the threshold for the cap to be lifted.
The benefit cap was introduced in 2013, and limits the total amount of support some low-earning and non-working families can receive from the social security system. What has been the impact of this policy? What will a recently announced change to the cap mean for families? And does this change go far enough?
