We want to hear from you: please tell us about your experience of the online community.
est1980 said: I'm pretty sure I'm right that my SDP shouldn't have been taken away,
est1980 said: I'm pretty sure I'm right that ... my uc should be exactly what they were on previous legacy benefits.
calcotti said: est1980 said: I'm pretty sure I'm right that my SDP shouldn't have been taken away, Agreed. The new statement for your first assessment period should show all the elements now known to be applicable (the disabled child element and the carer element) at that time plus the SDP transitional element. You should definitely request a Mandatory Reconsideration (and go to tribunal if the MR doesn't get the correct result). est1980 said: I'm pretty sure I'm right that ... my uc should be exactly what they were on previous legacy benefits. No. Your UC will be what it is - it's unlikely to exactly match your previous benefits.One other potential issue depending on what date in April you applied for UC. If you applied before 11th April your initial UC payment will be based on 2021-22 benefit rates. Your second payment will use 2022-23 rates which will result in the SDP element reducing. If you applied on or after 11th April your first payment will already be at 2022-23 rates so you'll be fine until next April.Hi, when I said my uc would be exactly the same, I was referring to my personal circumstances with regards to my eligibility for income support and UC,and the government's promise that anyone moved to UC via managed migration would not be 'worse off', rather than the actual amount of money should be exactly the same. It was after the end of the last tax year so not affected by that, although even if it had been, would have only been reduced by a few pounds, not £285.Many thanks for your response
est1980 said: Hi, when I said my uc would be exactly the same, I was referring to my personal circumstances with regards to my eligibility for income support and UC,and the government's promise that anyone moved to UC via managed migration would not be 'worse off', rather than the actual amount of money should be exactly the same.
est1980 said: calcotti said: Hi, when I said my uc would be exactly the same, I was referring to my personal circumstances with regards to my eligibility for income support and UC,and the government's promise that anyone moved to UC via managed migration would not be 'worse off'
calcotti said: Hi, when I said my uc would be exactly the same, I was referring to my personal circumstances with regards to my eligibility for income support and UC,and the government's promise that anyone moved to UC via managed migration would not be 'worse off'
calcotti said: est1980 said: Hi, when I said my uc would be exactly the same, I was referring to my personal circumstances with regards to my eligibility for income support and UC,and the government's promise that anyone moved to UC via managed migration would not be 'worse off', rather than the actual amount of money should be exactly the same. Under managed migration the money would be exactly the same unless the UC was worth more.You are not going through managed migration, yours is 'natural' migration (daft name).
est1980 said: However, the pip appeal win cancels out my change of circumstances. The backdated award means there was never a change in circumstances. But , for the purposes of my issue, with regards to the sdp being reduced it appears the type of migration shouldn't actually be a factor.
The value must be greater than or equal to 1.
Get more out of your online community by signing in or registering