Third Report: Universal Credit: the wait for a first payment

The government explicitly rejects the recommendation to publish its analysis of foodbank use drivers, stating that due to resource reallocation for the COVID-19 pandemic, it will not be conducting or commissioning any research.

The government rejects the recommendation to investigate the link between Universal Credit and rent arrears, citing resource reallocation due to the pandemic and arguing that attributing arrears solely to UC is simplistic.

The government rejects the implicit recommendation to conduct further research and evaluation to understand the drivers and clinical impact of psychological distress linked to Universal Credit, citing resource reallocation due to the COVID-19 pandemic and outlining other support measures.

The government rejects the recommendation to conduct or commission research on the impact of Universal Credit and the five-week wait on food bank use, rent arrears, and mental health, citing resource reallocation due to the COVID-19 pandemic and highlighting other support measures.

The government states that Ministerial meetings with stakeholders are already published quarterly on GOV.UK but rejects publishing details of every engagement, including topics discussed and actions taken, citing the need to maintain trust and partnership with stakeholders.

The government rejects eliminating the five-week wait by continuing legacy benefits, citing existing advance payments and run-ons. It also rejects offering fortnightly payments by default, stating that monthly payments prepare claimants for work and Alternative Payment Arrangements are available case-by-case.

The government discusses existing repayable Advances for financial support, the Breathing Space scheme, and increased funding for debt advice, but does not commit to the recommended non-repayable 'starter payment'.

The government rejects the need for a starter payment, stating that New Claim Advances are already available, and introducing non-repayable advances would increase fraud risk and administrative burden.

The government rejects the recommendation to pay all first-time Universal Credit claimants a 'starter payment,' stating that New Claim Advances are already available and that non-repayable advances would increase fraud risk, administrative burden, and could lead to inappropriate gains.

The government rejects the recommendation for further support, including starter payments or enhanced backdating, for terminally ill claimants, stating that existing New Claim Advances negate the need for a starter payment and that UC already has an established fast-track process for these claimants.

The government explicitly rejects the committee's finding, reiterating that a new claim Advance is not a loan but rather a spreading of UC entitlement. It explains that advances are limited to estimated awards, with support available for budgeting and repayment deferrals for hardship cases.

The government rejects publishing additional specific data on advance repayment deferrals, stating no plans to do so at this point, though it will include general information on advances in its annual report. It does not address the recommendation for work coaches to proactively inform claimants of the deferral option.

The government rejects the recommendation to offer direct payment of the housing element of an Advance to landlords. It states that existing Managed Payments to Landlords are already available and cautions against the potential for landlord pressure if this option were introduced for advances.

The government rejects expanding Help to Claim to directly provide ongoing support like debt advice and digital skills. It states that Help to Claim already signposts claimants to other support services for these needs and defends the current scope of the service.

The government rejects the recommendations, stating payment timeliness must be balanced with fraud reduction, and defending the existing WCA process which includes backdating awards if a delay occurs. They do not agree to pay claimants at the highest rate during WCA delays or limit repayments to only deliberate fraud.

The government rejects the recommendation for a 10% cap on debt repayments, stating its 30% cap balances claimant needs with responsible fund administration. It does not address recommendations to delay debt recovery until advances are repaid, write off debts over 6 years, or extend the FCA's approach to public sector debts.

The government rejects the recommendation, stating that UC is designed for quick claims at the point of need, and that extending backdating beyond one month could disincentivize this. They do not commit to reviewing evidence use for backdating, publishing work coach information, or increasing awareness.

The government rejects extending the backdating period beyond one month, arguing that it could disincentivize claimants from making their UC claims at the point of need. They reiterate that existing limited provisions and support are available for vulnerable claimants.

The government rejects the recommendation to align Universal Credit payments with rent schedules, stating it is not appropriate due to potential difficulties if claimants change address, and highlights an existing payment alignment feature for social landlords.

The government rejects the committee's characterisation of the Universal Credit IT system as rigid and clunky, instead asserting its agility and strong performance in supporting claimants throughout the pandemic, maintaining high payment timeliness.

The government rejects the recommendation to consider more flexible assessment systems, stating that such a system is not easily operationalised due to complexities with fluctuating earnings and multiple income sources, which would cause financial uncertainty and poor customer service.

The government rejects the proposed model for daily pay rate estimation and day-one payments, explaining it cannot be easily operationalised for claimants with fluctuating or multiple earnings due to reconciliation challenges and potential over/underpayments, but it does detail the data received from HMRC.