Backdated pip and ub

est1980

Hi, this is a bit complex so I'll try and make it as clear as possible. Thanks for taking the time to read. 

My son had received dla his whole life, when he turned 16,he got moved to pip and was refused (Feb 2022).
I appealed. 
At this point I lost my entitlement to income support and carers allowance and was forced to make a claim for universal credit.
I made the claim for uc and was awarded it as if my son had no pip award as the appeal had not yet been decided. 
I was also in receipt of the severe disability premium for myself before making the uc claim and this was added to my uc claim. 
During my first assessment period for uc, (apr/may 2022)my sons appeal was decided in his favour, and backdated to the date of the original claim (July 2021)

Heres where it gets a bit messy
I've now updated my uc claim to reflect my sons pip appeal win. 

They have backdated my caring component to the 1st period, but deducted it from my transitional payment.so no additional payment was made. No disabled child element was added for that period.
The next month the disabled child element was added,but this completely wiped out my SDP, as they say I'm now getting extra uc, and at a rare higher than my previous legacy benefits were-which is incorrect-its just now back to what it was and always should have been I'm trying to explain to them that my uc hasn't increased, it's just been adjusted to account for the backdated pip award.

I'm pretty sure I'm right that my SDP shouldn't have been taken away, and that my uc should be exactly what they were on previous legacy benefits. I'm finding it very difficult to navigate this and just keep getting 'a colleague will look into this and get back to you'

Its been 5 weeks now and no one has got back to me other than to say 'you're sdp has reduced to nothing because your uc has increased' I feel like I'm banging my head against a brick wall, and so far am over £800 short on what I would usually have got before. Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated
Just for clarity 

Sons pip claimed July 2021.
 Denied Feb 2022.
Income support stopped, moved to UC. 
PIP APPEAL won April 2022 and backdated til July 2021
UC claim started April 2022

SDP originally paid, but then reduced by £168 due to addition of carers element
And No disabled child element paid for apr/may period. Sdp
May /June 
SDP completely eroded due to addition of disabled child element.
Still no back payment for the disabled child element for 1st assessment period. 

Biblioklept

If it was a new award for PIP and the carer element and disabled child element were new it would wipe SDP but as they should have been there from the first assessment period, I think you're right that they shouldn't have taken your SDP transitional. 
I can't they accounted for situations like yours so probably a fight on your hands to get it corrected.

poppy123456

Yes i agree with yourself and biblioklept here. I'd advise you to request the MR on the decision to wipe your SDP transitional protection. Tell them that if the PIP award was correct from when the original decision was made then you would still be on Income Support. If you had moved to UC for any other reason then the SDP wpuld still be place because the other elements would have been there from the start of your claim.

calcotti

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.

est1980

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 

calcotti

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).

poppy123456

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'

Your move to UC wasn't for managed migration. It was because of a change of circumstances which prompted a move, which is called "natural migration"

In this instance you would be slightly worse off than when you were claiming IS.

est1980

Thank you everyone who responded. I know it was a long one. But it's helps to have a second (or 3td,4th,5th) opinion. I did request a mandatory reconsideration, my case manager just replied with 'ill get a colleague to look into it, and if youre owed any money I will pay it to you' which didn't seem to be a very 'official' acceptance of my request for an MR, but it is in the journal so is there for all too see. It says you can call the uc helpline if you need more help, but all they do is send a message to your case manager! I think to cover myself, I'll ask for a letter confirming my MR has been accepted and see what happens. I'll update with any further news, as I'm thinking this could end up being quite a common position for people with children 'aging out' of DLA. Thanks again everyone 

est1980

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).

Oh OK, all the paperwork I received when I had to claim UC referred to 'managed migration' , so that's why I used that term. If it is in fact a natural rather than managed migration, what would be the difference? 

calcotti

Under natural migration you get the SDP transitional element because you had SDP in your previous benefit. The SDP element is a fixed amount at the time it is applied to the start of your claim. Your UC amount will be whatever it works out as.

Under managed migration people will not get the SDP element but will get a transitional element so that their initial UC amount exactly matches their previous benefits if the UC amount would otherwise be less. By definition the transitional amount will vary between claimants depending on their proviso entitlement.

In both cases the element reduces as other elements are increased or added to the UC award after that initial month.

est1980

I understand this. 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. I understand the gradual decrease of the sdp over time for any increases of UC or the UC rates going forward. Thanks

calcotti

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.

Absolutely. I only raised it because you used the term 'managed migration' - it has no actual bearing on your situation and the fact that DWP have got it wrong.

est1980

Yeah I understood. There should have been a question mark, at the end of my sentence as I was clarifying I understood it correctly  🤦🏾‍♀️which would have made much more sense sorry x😕

L_Volunteer

I hear you @est1980. Please try not to worry, we all make errors sometimes. Are you still wanting to clarify if you have understood it correctly?

Unfortunately, my area of expertise is not in this area but hopefully, Calcotti or @poppy123456 can clarify this for you 

est1980

L_Volunteer hi, nope I've got it all straight now. Just wanted to double check that the type of 'migration' didn't change my entitlement, which was cleared up very kindly by Calcotti. Thank you 😊 now I just need to get my case manager to figure it out and repay the £868.69 that they have underpaid me in the last 8 weeks, fingers crossed before i totally run out of food, gas and electric 🙄

Biblioklept

That's a lot of money to be missing!! Hope they pay you soon @est1980