Login FormClose

Free, fortnightly PIP, ESA and UC Updates

Over 80,000 claimants and professionals subscribe to the UK's leading source of benefits news.

 

A High Court challenge has been mounted against the failure to give a £20 uplift to claimants of legacy benefits, such as employment support allowance (ESA), in spite of the payment being given to universal credit (UC) claimants. Success could lead to payments of over £1,000 for almost two million ESA claimants.

At the start of the pandemic, the chancellor announced a £20 increase in the standard rate of UC to help claimants cope with the additional costs of the pandemic. This could include such things as face masks, hand sanitiser, home delivery charges and increased utility bills because of being at home continually.

However, claimants on exactly equivalent ‘legacy benefits’ such as ESA were not given the uplift because the DWP claimed that its IT system could not cope with the change.

The case is being brought by two ESA claimants in the support group.

They are arguing that the failure to treat them in the same way as UC claimants is discriminatory and unjustified.

There have been many objections to the discriminatory way the uplift has been applied, including by the chair of the House of Commons Work and Pensions Committee who said:

“It’s simply not right for people to miss out on support just because they happen, through no fault of their own, to be claiming the ‘wrong’ kind of benefit.”

The claimants are being represented by Osborne’s solicitors. You can read the full story on their website.

Comments  

#3 ALI EL-ALI 2021-05-06 14:11
thank you very much
#2 Kate27 2021-05-05 14:40
Not long ago they had to give out lots of back-pay in ESA premiums that had been unpaid for years, after the DWP Select Committee told them they had to seek the ESA claimants who hadn't been getting them.
Haven't learnt much, have they?
+2 #1 mrfibrospondodysthmatic 2021-05-03 20:58
So if Osbourne's solicitors succeed in winning these cases. Would that mean that the government will owe, and have to repay 2000.0000 other claimants of backpay monies equating to £1000 or more.

Because the nigh on other 2 million claimants are also being discriminated right?

Lets hope the judge rules in the claimants favour, as it only seem right and just to do so.

You need to be logged in to comment