Latest news with #disabilitybenefits
The Sun
21 hours ago
- Business
- The Sun
Date when thousands of Universal Credit households will get £1,000s back after DWP claim error
THE Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has confirmed when thousands will get £1,000s back after a major error. The payments are being issued to people who received certain disability benefits such as Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) and were moved to Universal Credit. 1 It was found some claimants unfairly lost out on Severe Disability Premiums (SDP) and Enhanced Disability Premiums (EDP) during the transition, resulting in a drop of income. Both premiums offered additional financial support on top of the standard allowance for certain means-tested benefits. Tens of thousands who transferred to Universal Credit and missed out on this protection have now been found to be owed arrears. Around 57,000 people are reportedly thought to be affected by the issue, with the vast majority having now received redress. But, the DWP has confirmed around 13,000 cases are yet to be processed and cleared. In its annual report published earlier this month, it said: "Unfortunately, some underpayments may be owed to customers who no longer have an active ESA claim and restrictions in data make it difficult to identify, assess and correct these errors." The department said it was working its way through all the remaining 13,000 cases which should be completed by September. The report added: "We are working to both correct existing errors and to prevent new errors in the new premiums cases." The total arrears being paid to the roughly 57,000 claimants who missed out on SDP and EDP is worth £452million. Solicitors Leigh Day, who brought a legal challenge for claimants on disability benefits who didn't receive income protection while moving over to Universal Credit, secured a settle for 275 claimants who list their SDP earlier this year. Stop handing out new cars for FOOD INTOLERANCE says Kemi Badenoch as she demands Labour cut ballooning benefits bill These claimants were awarded between £200 and £3,000 for the loss of income they incurred. We have asked the DWP how the remaining 13,000 people affected by the issue will receive any compensation and will update this story when we have heard back. We have also asked how much the approximately 44,000 who have already received compensation got on average. Will I need to move to Universal Credit? The DWP is currently moving everyone from old-style "legacy" benefits onto Universal Credit, through a process known as managed migration. Universal Credit was set up to replace these benefits and the scheme kicked off in November 2022 after a successful pilot in July 2019. As part of the process, households on legacy benefits are sent "migration notices" in the post which tell them how to make the move to Universal Credit as it's not automatic. Households must apply for Universal Credit within three months of receiving their managed migration letter. Failing to do this can result in benefits being stopped. Tax credits, income-based jobseeker's allowance, income support and housing benefit (for those under the state pension age) were permanently discontinued in April. The remaining households, currently claiming income-related employment and support allowance (ESA), will be asked to move to Universal Credit by December 2025. Can I get help claiming Universal Credit? As well as benefit calculators, anyone moving from legacy benefit to Universal Credit can find help in a number of ways. You can visit your local Jobcentre by searching at There's also a free service called Help to Claim from Citizen's Advice: England: 0800 144 8 444 Scotland: 0800 023 2581 Wales: 08000 241 220 You can also get help online from advisers by visiting, Will I be better off on Universal Credit? ANALYSIS by James Flanders, The Sun's Chief Consumer Reporter: Around 1.4million people on legacy benefits will be better off after switching to Universal Credit, according to the government. A further 300,000 would see no change in payments, while around 900,000 would be worse off under Universal Credit. Of these, around 600,000 can get top-up payments (transitional protection) if they move under the managed migration process, so they don't lose out on cash immediately. The majority of those - around 400,000 - are claiming employment support allowance (ESA). Those who move voluntarily and are worse off won't get these top-up payments and could lose cash. Those who miss the managed migration deadline and later make a claim may not get transitional protection. The clock starts ticking on the three-month countdown from the date of the first letter, and reminders are sent via post and text message. There is a one-month grace period after this, during which any claim to Universal Credit is backdated, and transitional protection can still be awarded. Examples of those who may be entitled to less on Universal Credit include: Households getting ESA and the severe disability premium and enhanced disability premium Households with the lower disabled child addition on legacy benefits Self-employed households who are subject to the Minimum Income Floor after the 12-month grace period has ended Either way, if these households don't switch in the future, they risk missing out on any future benefit increase and seeing payments frozen.
Times
4 days ago
- Politics
- Times
Keir Starmer needs his authority back. Can a Blairite veteran help?
F or a fortnight after Sir Keir Starmer's U-turn on disability benefits, the cabinet pondered what, if anything, he would do to shore up his political authority. On Wednesday came the surprising, if underwhelming, response when he suspended four rebellious MPs, most of them little known to the public. Privately, however, Starmer is planning to go further than most expect, first with a summer recess shake-up of the Downing Street operation. It can be revealed that he intends to start with the appointment of Tim Allan, who is on a final shortlist to become permanent secretary for communications, a new civil service role giving him influence across all government departments, and is Starmer's preferred candidate. Allan is a former No 10 director of communications who served in the Blair government and remains close to Alastair Campbell and Pat McFadden. But he is best known within political circles for founding Portland, the lobbying company closely linked to New Labour. Its clients have historically included the governments of Kazakhstan, Russia and Qatar, for whom it set up anonymous blogs attacking critics of its World Cup bid. Campbell remains on its payroll as a 'senior adviser'.
The Independent
4 days ago
- Politics
- The Independent
How Keir Starmer's crackdown on his own MPs could backfire – and even help Jeremy Corbyn
The Labour Party will start the Commons summer recess next Tuesday in an unhappy place. MPs were already drifting off from Westminster on Wednesday for their six-week break when Keir Starmer suspended four Labour MPs for disloyalty, with Diane Abbott to follow the next day. 'Parliament was already like the Mary Celeste,' one Labour insider told me. 'Now the mood is mutinous.' Starmer's move shocked his MPs because he had taken a more conciliatory line immediately after the revolt over cuts to disability benefits. As my colleague John Rentoul argued, there is a strong case for saying he needed to restore his battered authority. Removing the whip from four of the rebels was designed to limit future revolts looming over special education needs and, possibly, the two-child benefit limit. A free hit on welfare would have swelled the number of rebels. It was also an important nod to the silent majority of Labour MPs who supported the welfare bill; many felt angry that, after they defended the measure (sometimes through gritted teeth), the government pulled the rug from under them by filleting it to prevent a humiliating Commons defeat. However, even some Starmer allies believe his disciplinary crackdown could backfire – and that it displays weakness rather than strength. One cabinet minister called it "small man syndrome" – not a reference to Starmer (5ft 8in) but Morgan McSweeney, his chief of staff, who chose Starmer to front his crusade to regain control of the party from the Corbynistas. Others blamed Starmer rather than McSweeney, saying he was wrong to target Rachel Maskell, one of the four, who is respected in the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP). 'He [Starmer] is the school bully who beats someone up on the last day of term so they feel rotten for the whole summer,' one Labour insider told me. Starmer has discovered that having a huge majority does not guarantee an easy life, as some colleagues expected in the euphoria of victory a year ago. There are only enough government posts for a third of Labour MPs. 'It brings big problems,' one minister told me, noting that the newbies first elected last year are showing a surprisingly independent streak. 'The PLP is a much more complex animal than we realised,' they said. I believe the prime minister needs to give the PLP more TLC and to reach out beyond the loyalists so he can isolate the 35 MPs on the hard left. Abbott is a dangerous enemy to pick. She outwitted the party's leadership the first time she was suspended for alleged antisemitism by refusing to stand down at last year's election. But Labour's legal department judged that the party should repeat its initial disciplinary action after she doubled down in a BBC Radio 4 interview on her previous remarks about there being different types of racism, while denying she is antisemitic. Although the Labour grassroots loves Abbott, there appears to be less sympathy for her in the Labour high command this time. Some figures were puzzled why she decided to repeat comments for which she apologised in 2023, and wonder whether she was goading Starmer into suspending her again. Although Labour whips talked Downing Street out of disciplining many more MPs over the welfare revolt, some Starmer allies suspect he is reaching for the playbook that served him well in opposition, when he defined Labour against the Corbyn left. They fear privately it might not work in government and, ironically, could make the breakaway socialist party planned by Jeremy Corbyn more viable electorally. The new party's on-off launch has been messy. It is striking that Corbyn allies such as John McDonnell, who was his shadow chancellor, have not jumped ship and see their future inside Labour. Breaking up is hard to do; some left-wingers want to stay, fight and turn the tables on Starmer. They describe the Corbyn project as 'Jeremy's old gang' and suspect it won't fly. However, opinion polls suggest the as-yet-unnamed party could attract 10 per cent of the vote. Not enough to break through under first-past-the-post but possibly enough to help deny Labour victory in a 2029 election, when five- or six-party politics will guarantee lots of closely fought contests. If the Corbyn party and the Greens agreed a pact to fight different seats, as they might well do, Labour would have real cause for concern. The Corbyn party might also appeal to those 16- and 17-year-olds who exercise their right to vote under plans announced by the government on Thursday. I think Starmer should be wary of fighting this particular war. His achievement in seeing off the Corbyn left was a remarkable one. But now he is prime minister, not leader of the opposition. The voters want him to change the country, not his party; that box has been ticked. Too many internal battles will remind some voters of the Conservatives' chaos, which he promised to end. Starmer leads his country, not just his party. He needs to find a better defining purpose for his government than a forever factional war against the left.
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Health
- Yahoo
Am I eligible for 'massively underclaimed' £5,700 health benefit?
Martin Lewis has warned millions of pensioners could be missing out a "massively underclaimed" benefit that can be worth more than £5,000 a year. Lewis highlighted the underutilised attendance allowance earlier this week, which provides money to pensioners with disabilities. Writing in the Money Saving Expert newsletter, Lewis said: "For many older people who are ill or start to face mental or physical disability, life doesn't just get tougher, it gets costlier too. 'That's why 18 months ago we launched our attendance allowance guide and awareness campaign, and successes have flooded in since. Yet it remains massively underclaimed.' A recent study by Policy in Practice found more than a million pensioners could be missing out on the benefit, meaning over £5bn of unclaimed benefits. What is attendance allowance? Attendance allowance – also known as pension age disability payment in Scotland – is a non-means-tested weekly payment to help cover the costs of pensioners who need support with some form of disability. It is designed for pensioners over the age of 66 with a wide range of disabilities to cover the costs of someone assisting them with their day-to-day life. There are two rates available depending on the severity of the disability. They are: The lower rate of £73.90 a week, equivalent to £3,842 a year. This is for people who need help either during the day or the night. The higher rate of £110.40 a week, equivalent to £5,740 a year. This is for people who need help during the day and the night. Crucially, you do not need to actually be receiving care to get the benefit, you only need to have one of the listed disabilities. How do I know which benefits I'm entitled to? There are numerous different services that can tell you if you are possibly missing out on a benefit. You will need to fill in an extensive form that will ask you questions about your income, assets, age, disabilities and dependents. The government has its own calculator you can view here. Citizens Advice also runs its own system that you can fill out online, or you can contact them over the phone. Lewis's MoneySavingExpert website also has a '10 minutes benefit calculator' that you can fill out here. How do I claim the allowance? One of the biggest myths around attendance allowance is who qualifies for it. To qualify, you only need to meet the following criteria: Be over the age of 66 Have a qualifying disability That is it, you don't need to be claiming state pension and as long as you are not earning more than £100,000 a year, you can claim the benefit. There is no defined list of what conditions can qualify you for claiming attendance allowance. Illnesses like Parkinson's, dementia and blindness are almost guaranteed to get you on the benefit, but if you can argue your condition means you need someone else to help you with your day-to-day life you may qualify for it. To claim it, you will need to prove that a doctor or some other medical professional has said you could benefit from outside help. This help could come in the form of assistance with food preparation, getting dressed, or communicating with others. You can also qualify if you need supervision when carrying out tasks. This is usually for people with mental disabilities who may, for example, need to be supervised when taking their medicines. You will automatically get the higher rate if you are terminally ill and not expected to live more than a year. To claim the allowance, you will need to fill out a long form, but someone else, like a family member or carer, can help you with it. You can find it here on the government's website. Once sent, you may have to attend an assessment, but not everyone is required to do this.
The Independent
6 days ago
- Politics
- The Independent
Keir Starmer has asserted his power by suspending the Labour rebels – about time, too
Keir Starmer has acted against the most self-indulgent of his rebel MPs, suspending four of them and sacking a further three from their non-jobs as trade envoys. The whip was cracked with deliberation, a week after 49 Labour MPs opposed the government over its attempt to reduce the rate of increase in disability benefits spending. Starmer understands that no government with such a huge majority can afford to be pushed around by a minority faction. All Labour MPs were elected on a platform of moderation and fiscal responsibility. They owe their election to him – and to his efforts in opposition to reassure the voters that Labour can be trusted to manage the public finances. Yes, one can deplore the macho locker-room language of an unnamed Labour source saying that the four have been punished for 'persistent knobheadery'. But the anonymous loudmouth is essentially right that some MPs have been self-important in putting their ideology above the interests of the government and the country. The hardcore rebels, meanwhile, have confirmed their lack of judgement. They thought there was safety in numbers. 'They can't sack us all,' one of them said, at a time when more than 100 MPs were threatening to vote against the government. Some of them continued to think that, after Starmer was persuaded by Angela Rayner to take most of the savings out of the bill, which was still opposed by 49 Labour MPs. They were right that it would have been foolish for Starmer and Alan Campbell, the chief whip, to have suspended all the rebels. But it was essential that they sack some of them to make the point that a vote against the government is not a cost-free option. Some of the rebels who escaped suspension continued to demonstrate their inability to think straight. It was unfair, they said, to discipline their comrades who had raised legitimate concerns about the bill and persuaded the government to U-turn. It shows how 'thin-skinned' and 'weak' the prime minister is, one said. This is the soft-headedness of the soft left. The point is that the government U-turned – and 49 of them still voted against. The four persistent offenders are not being disciplined because the government agreed with them, but because they continued to vote against the bill after the government had conceded a large part of their demands. Tony Blair never felt he had to suspend the 'persistent knobheads' of his day. When Hilary Armstrong, his chief whip, suggested suspending Jeremy Corbyn, he said he thought the party could 'tolerate that level of difference'. Well, I wonder if he has changed his mind since. Starmer is not in the same situation, despite some parallels between then and now. Blair faced a similar-sized rebellion from his backbenchers (47) in his first year as prime minister, over a similar issue – cuts to lone-parent benefit. But Starmer was confronted with insubordination in the first week of his government, with John McDonnell, Corbyn's shadow chancellor, leading a revolt of seven MPs against the King's speech because it failed to lift the two-child benefit limit. Starmer rightly suspended the seven – although he allowed four of them, Richard Burgon, Ian Byrne, Imran Hussain and Rebecca Long-Bailey, back into the parliamentary party in February. The selective approach continues. The four who were suspended yesterday – Rachael Maskell, Neil Duncan-Jordan, Chris Hinchliff and Brian Leishman – were disciplined not just because they voted against the disability benefits bill, but because they have been serial rebels throughout the government's first year. The suspensions send a clear message to potential rebels that opposing the prime minister comes at a price. If they cannot 'tolerate that level of difference', in Blair's words, then fine – but they won't be able to stand for Labour at the next election. They are free to join another party, such as the one being set up by Zarah Sultana (one of McDonnell's fellow suspendees) in the name of Corbyn. But they will know that their chances of retaining their seats under a Corbynite banner are minimal. As for the trade envoys, the position is simple: you cannot have a government post and vote against the government. Duncan-Jordan and Leishman have hit back, saying they were not elected to make people 'poorer'. But Meg Hillier and Debbie Abrahams, the Labour select committee chairs who led the early phase of the rebellion, would say the same thing. They made their representations in private, persuaded Starmer to think again and then voted with the government. They were not elected to make people poorer – but they were not elected to blow up the public finances, either.
