High Court rules that benefit cap income calculation is irrational for claimants paid 4 weekly

CPAG wins High Court challenge of the application of the benefit cap.to a claimant’s award, despite the fact that she works 16 hours per week at a national living wage, simply because she is paid 4 weekly rather than monthly –

The judge agreed that the DWP’s approach to earnings in UC is inconsistent with its aim of incentivising work and making work pay:  –

‘… the impact of the regime contained in the Regulations discourages work when the work available is paid on a lunar month basis. In such cases, for the majority of months the Regulations subject the First Claimant to the benefit cap, as if she were not working, resulting in her receiving an arbitrarily reduced overall UC award. The scheme is said to be designed to be responsive to changes in earned income, and to make work pay to the fullest possible extent. But in these circumstances, it is neither.’

Pantellerisco and others v SSWP is available from CPAG’s website and we’ll get a summary out later today…

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.