The DWP is to begin continuous surveillance of the bank accounts of all pension credit, universal credit and employment and support allowance claimants using powers under a bill currently going through Parliament.  The department have said that they intend to use their new power to force any third party to pass on data to them more widely in the future.

The power to compel third parties into providing any data that the DWP wants in order to search for fraud and error is being conferred in last minute amendments slipped into the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill, which has now passed its third reading in the Commons and moved to the Lords.

Initially the DWP say that they will use their powers to oblige the UK’s top 15 banks to monitor the accounts of all means-tested benefits claimants and report every time an account goes over the  capital limit or is used abroad for more than four weeks.

Because every DWP payment into a bank account has an identifying code attached to it, all banks know exactly which of their customers is on benefits and which benefits they receive.

Setting up software to automatically send details to the DWP of every claimant account that goes over the capital limit or is used abroad for more than four weeks will be very straightforward for banks.

The DWP say that each identified claim will be investigated in the normal way and that penalties will not be automatically imposed.

At the moment, almost 9 million claimants would be caught in the surveillance net, including:

  • 5.8 million universal credit claimants
  • 1.6 million employment and support allowance claimants
  • 1.4 million pension credit claimants

Any bank failing to collect and pass on data to the DWP will be subject to heavy fines.

 The new system will begin to be rolled out in 2025, though all banks may not be fully involved before 2030.

The DWP estimates that it will cost around £30 million a year for them to investigate potential fraud identified by the new system, but that they will save £500 million a year through reduced fraud and error.  

They also estimate that over the first ten years, the new powers will result in 74,000 prosecution cases and 2,500 custodial sentences.  

There is no doubt that the DWP intend to use these new powers much more widely.  The impact assessment for the new powers says that:

“The power is not limited to a specific type of data or type of institution/Third-Party to allow us to fight new fraud and error issues as they emerge and engage with new institutions as efficient opportunities become available to us.”

Later, the same document says: 

“This measure is drafted broadly . . .  to enable DWP to apply this measure to non-financial organisations in future if it is deemed appropriate and proportionate”

The new surveillance powers for the DWP appear to enjoy cross party support. Only 51 MPs voted against the amendment, with 30 of those being SNP and just 7 each from Labour and the Lib Dems.

Anyone who imagines that the DWP will use such sweeping powers reasonably and proportionately probably hasn’t ever claimed benefits.

And they probably also don’t remember the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, which was brought in to combat terrorism and organised crime and ended up being used to spy on dog walkers, pigeon feeders and people putting out their wheelie bins too early.

Capital and abroad fraud account for less than 15% of benefits fraud and error. The DWP will want to delve into many other aspects of claimants lives in order to identify the other 85%.  This is, beyond doubt, the thin end of a very thick wedge.

You can download a copy of the amendments to the Data Protection and Digital information Bill here.  The Power To Require Information For Social Security Purposes section begins on page 98.

You can read the impact assessment for the DWP surveillance powers here.

Comments

Write comments...
or post as a guest
Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    CC · 8 months ago
    Interesting, every article on the internet, seemed to be speculating to whats going on, many reporting its already started or about to start very soon.  This article states exactly what they looking for and its not until 2025.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Sara · 7 months ago
      @CC That's right, CC, and not even intended to be fully rolled out until 2030. We all know how delayed these measures usually are #universal credit. So time to sign the petitions, raise the profile and force the debates/amendments. The bill is ridiculously long, far and wide reaching, and the government tried to sneak in the surveillance clauses at the end, hoping they would escape scrutiny.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Joe · 8 months ago
    Just putting this here incase people haven't seen it yet https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/650940
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Terry · 8 months ago
    What can go wrong??
    Look at how effective the Post Office was, determining fraud.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Shuree · 7 months ago
      @Terry ThecDWP we’re going to use the same horizon system. Thank good ness they didn’t !
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    MARTINE · 8 months ago
    I AM SELLING ITEMS I DON'T NEED/WEAR ANYMORE ON EBAY.  IS THAT ALLOWED?  HOW MUCH AM I ALLOWED TO SELL?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Karen Keita · 7 months ago
      @MARTINE It two fold. You can sell 30 items on vinted. But I've also read that if it's your own items it's classed as recycling then it's not counted. Vinted has just put a new policy in place and in the small print confirms they have to notify benefits.  EBay are much stricter. Its a complete nightmare. People are to be kept on poverty line and not allowed to help themselves even to pay for heating. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Emma · 8 months ago
    I think they're going to look how people on benefits are spending their money and try and cut what they hand out that way. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Its only me · 8 months ago
    When this comes in, hopefully Labour will leave it on statute. Wait until the next election and announce, they are going to get rid of it and see if the Tories support. If no they will be toast
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Raymondo · 7 months ago
      @Karen Keita aggree didnt hear them say much about this ,thought they were for the poor
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Karen Keita · 7 months ago
      @Andy Exactly Labour are no longer the people's protection not poorer section anyway. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Andy · 8 months ago
      @Its only me There was majority Labour support for the bill when it passed through the HOC. Don't expect Labour to change or get rid of anything.
      Rachel Reeves has said Labour are going to be tougher on benefits than the Tories have been. She was saying just last week that Labour will be the party for working people, not welfare.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Stevo · 8 months ago
    Let's be very clear, this is the thin end of a very large wedge, if this all goes through Parliament,  how long will it be before HMRC seek powers 'just to ensure everyone is paying the correct amount of tax' I guarantee that in a couple of years time, the state will be monitoring every bank account in the land, BEWARE!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      C · 7 months ago
      @Stevo HMRC already have these powers and more. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Karen Keita · 7 months ago
      @mrfibro Never they are an exception to the rule as always.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Karen Keita · 7 months ago
      @Stevo They already ARE. My brother in law in palative care only been on benefits July had in stopped within one hour of £6,000 pension going into his bank account due to him dying so he's got it earlier. He had £600 already in the account. HSBC told us they have to by law tell benefits immediately.  
      So within ONE HOUR all benefits were stopped. He's paid for his cremation out of it. Please read my post above. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      mrfibro · 8 months ago
      @Stevo Stevo,

      Just wondering if HMRC  will be monitoring the corrupt MP's and corporate giants accounts too.  And not to forget the dodgy tax evader, evading paying taxes in the tunes of multiple billions per year.

      The Etonians are in support of tax evaders on this scale, coz they too evade, it's all corruption, and the empty tax koffers have to be filled by the again, poor man/ woman & them & those on welfare.

      Good luck to all, we're going to need it.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Andy · 8 months ago
      @keeping it real The Government and House of Lords won't care what left leaning papers report. No amount of noise in the media will stop this bill passing into law. It might have some amendments but it will pass, just like UC did, despite numerous concerns being raised.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Alan · 8 months ago
    I’ve just been flagged for closing a little pension to pay my bills while on benefits only paperwork insurance company can use is to send p45 as account closed so DWP think I have a job and stoped benefits even though it’s a small lump sum which does not count for benefits but there to stupid to understand that it’s really sad waiting to have operation on the NHS so can’t work atm
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Karen · 7 months ago
      @Alan They've just done the same for my termally ill brother in law. 
      Stopped it dead within one hour of money going into bank. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    escuzion · 8 months ago
    I find it absurd that people are punished for being responsible with their money. People should not be penalised for exceeding £6000 in their bank account. The gov wants you to spend spend spend because it's the only way they can get your money through taxes. That potential £500 million a year pales in comparison to the amount of money being moved through fraudulent activity by the corporate elite and other people in positions of power, and It certainly does not justify such intrusive surveillance.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Karen · 7 months ago
      @escuzion Yet the cost of a burial is more than that and if your on benefits and you have any family member working they are liable to pay for your funeral not as stated that there's a fund its only if family on benefits too. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      mrfibro · 8 months ago
      @escuzion Hi Escuzion,

      Your absolutely correct in what you have said.  One law for them, another one for us.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    O · 8 months ago
    I think it's wrong !! Someone's bank account is private and very personal to them!!! And should remain so!!! I also know that Jeremy Hunt had something do with this as he absolutely hates disabled people as everytime he's spoken so far over the years it's criminalising the disabled and that shouldn't be allowed!! And I've heard other mps do the same ! Gone are the days of common decency and respect not all disabilities are visible and some are internal and some don't always mean you'll end up with a facial disfigurement or any paralysis!!! The world we live in now all they want to do is attack people with disabilities! And they only want to here one side of it half of them! And that's the awful side not all people with disabilities are telling lies or abusing the system as they put it. There are people whom are and look normal and alot if people assume there ok when it's far far from the truth.!!! And that is internal not external!!! And jeremy hunt says work will help mental health I cab say that'd not the case going to work does not fix or heal mental health and  your telling me someone's aloud to go to work knowing they have mental health issues and they might be on every  drug known to man  that helps them cope with mental health and your ok with sending them to work? How does that and how is that allowed to suggested!! And also maybe should read more about the human rights act because alot of people will feel this is a violation of there human rights!! All disabilities and people with disabilities are 
    Not respected or treated with respect in the world 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Karen · 7 months ago
      @Alan W. True
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Alan W. · 8 months ago
      @O I had a feeling things were going to get worse, I get some of the reasons but as always, it's the ones like myself, on ESA because I can't work but want to will suffer. Basically, anyone who gets some kind of benefit is 'owned' by the tax payer and the government, anything we have that is used or paid for with the benefits doesn't belong to the claimant but by the tax payer. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Sarah · 8 months ago
    So you will have £1 deducted per week for every £250 you have over £6000 ? 
    Do they monitor and adjust this accordingly to what you have in your bank account at any given time ? EG one month you might have £7000 then the following month £5000 ? 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Andy · 7 months ago
      @Bella Yes, PIP is exempt from the £6000 savings limit 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Sara · 7 months ago
      @Bella Hi Bella, Pip is not means tested, so no capital limit.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Bella · 7 months ago
      @Andy Hello. Will PIP payment be exempt from said £6,000? I have been saving for an over 60s rented property for people with disabilities as where I live is completely unsuitable. Thank you.

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Karen · 7 months ago
      @Andy Correct
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Karen · 7 months ago
      @Sarah Nope my brother in law had £6,700 stopped his benefits within one hour of the pension going into the bank early because he's in palative care. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Total Banker · 8 months ago
    So basically if you claim benefit you lose your right to financial privacy? Banks should be sued for doing this to their customers tbh, pretty sure I didn't sign anything saying my bank can hand out my details. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Sara · 8 months ago
      @Total Banker Grim fact is the banks will be governed by legislation - if it's pssed, of course. Way to go yet.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Mila · 8 months ago
    I’ve been travelling abroad to be with my husband for long holidays, I’m really worried about this. What can happen? 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Karen · 7 months ago
      @mrfibro Nope it's all changed.
      I've just put a response for each benefit. 

      Can I just say that I went abroad for two weeks. While there my blood pressure went sky high so couldn't fly back. Couldn't get my ticket changed. So I was there 4wks before fit to fly. All my benefits got stopped immediately before the 4wks including pip. 
      I had to go through to a new claim when I got back and did not get money backdated. 
      This was 2019
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Karen · 7 months ago
      @Mila No more than 4wks and that depends on what benefits your on. 
      Pip 4wks
      Esa 2wks
      Housing benefit immediately 
      Council tax immediately 
      Universal credit 2wks.
      Dla 4wks
      Carers allowance 2wks
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      mrfibro · 8 months ago
      @Mila Hi Mila,

      What do you call long hols?  if it's over 30 days i believe it can open a can of worms.
      What i have read is... you can go for 30  days! 1 day getting there, 28 on the job, 1 day getting back to the UK = 30 days.  You are within there so called limit.

      What it doesn't say is can one do 30 days on multiple trips!!!
      Cannot find any clarification on that.

      Also i may be wrong here, but!  i read somewhere you can go for 3 months if on PIP ?
      So i'm a bit confused with this.  As for example if your on ESA or whatever = (30) days.
      PIP= (3 mths).

      Which one does a claimant pick !! 30 days  or 3 mth (may be more).

      The way i look at it, even if your ill/ disabled, and having an holiday can say help with pain, and having other people with you as helpers/ carers/ supporters, i dont see the problem.

      So spending money ESA/PIP  on hols shoudnt be a problem.

      It's like saying i spend me monies on carpets, curtains, clothes.

      or some people will spend their monies on fags, booze, drugs, or a combination of the 3.

      I see the problem being if your benefit income exceeds what DWP give you.

      Example large deposits to your bank account, or regular smaller amounts deposited, which tally up to quite a sum.

      I dare say some people buy dogs, those little ratty handbag things, which cost thousands of pounds, to reduce their incomes so they are under 6k.

      Thee dog owners would argue, that the dog is part of their  therapy, it's a comfort dog to help with your depression or whatever.


      Basically this all about big brother, there's bigger fish out there but they wont go after them, as disabled people etc are easier pickings.


      Good luck to all.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Andy · 8 months ago
      @Mila If you are away for more than 28 days at a time and haven't informed the DWP, then it could be viewed as fraud. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Skippy · 8 months ago
    This is all total BS!  DWP have been spying on us since at least 2015.  I went through a horrific divorce and came away with £100K, this was meant to buy a house with.  I went ahead and did this but due to solicitors dragging feet, I had £70K +/- in my bank account for literally two effing days.  The next thing is I am having my ass hauled in for being fraudulent.  I explained to them that the money was for my home and included renovations to make it habitable BUT in their tiny pathetic minds, they wanted to see ALL of my bank accounts from two years prior to the purchase.  I thought sod this, they wanna be assholes, I sent them FIVE years worth for all accounts they wanted, plus ALL purchase receipts.  I photocopied the lot and sent the lot to the address they wanted me to.  Funnily I did not hear from them for six whole months, at which point they still decided that I should be fined £600 of MY money (nothing to do with DWP) just because they wanted their claws in. So……they docked my income for 2 years until I paid the £600 back to them.  DWP are disgusting.  It wasn’t their money.  I had no other income because literally the house needed a lot spending on it to make it liveable for me as a disabled person.  What don’t they understand about that?  Beggars belief!  So no, the spying and constant surveillance goes if you are a claimant of ANY benefit.  If you have dealings with the DWP woe betide you!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Claire · 8 months ago
      @Skippy I’m in same bout , I got 30k from divorce but that is needed to find a 4 bed home and kit it out from nothing , I get uc I’m worried they will stop my benefits full stop 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      keeping it real · 8 months ago
      @Skippy Skippy, your experience is a typical example of the dwp always having had the right to investigate when they have reason to suspect fraud. £70K would have been an immediate red flag and could have been detected at various points. It's unfortunate for you that you were not able to avoid repaying £600, for what reason is not clear (perhaps because you did not inform dwp of your situation) but is not a reason for mass anxiety regarding the surveillance proposals in the Data Protection and Digital Information bill.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Matthew · 8 months ago
    Does anyone know if they will be able to check all our bank accounts? Or only the account that benefits are paid into. This excerpt suggests only the bank your benefits are paid to..

    'Because every DWP payment into a bank account has an identifying code attached to it, all banks know exactly which of their customers is on benefits and which benefits they receive.' 

    I am concerned about this as I do declare all my endings as a self employed person and as a family we get UC that tops us up depending how much ive earnt over the month. However, as a family struggling to make ends meet we regularly take out short term loans, money transfers from credit cards and personal and bank loans from friends and family,  all of which are paid back adhoc when benefits and work pay come in. I'm worried all of this will seem like we have more income than we declare and will therefore be deemed frausters! 

    Thanks in advance for any guidance. 

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Andmaq · 8 months ago
      @keeping it real Much appreciated for your informed reply. Will definitely contact CAB for advise.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      keeping it real · 8 months ago
      @Matthew Hi Matthew, all I can work out at the moment is that even if the bill goes through and becomes law, no individual accounts will be routinely accessed, just mass data somehow used to flag up fraudulent activity for further investigation. I really don't understand how that functions, and remember this is all very much at the planning stage. 

      Regarding your loans, I think as long as you don't have a regular income stream besides your earnings, and you do not keep more than the £6000 savings threshold in the bank when you borrow, you should be ok. The best way for friends or family to help out is for them to pay for things directly, rather than give or loan you money.

      You might want to check with an advice centre, such as CAB, though. You could get guidance there, too, about any other benefits or hardship loans you can apply for. It's quite common for people not to know all their entitlements.

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    jan evans · 8 months ago
    Like so many others, I have through good housekeeping and moderation, amassed savings during Covid that now exceed the £6K limit: by default we couldn't spend it.  My benefit is my only income, no fraudulent activity here your Honour: unlike the Tory, Baroness Moane, who lied and lied throughout about her family profiting from the UK tax payer to the tune of £60 million via the VIP lane set up by this Government to secure contracts during Covid (PPE - scandle, ongoing) I have moderate ME/CFS and am sorry to say, that after 45 yrs of public service work I now rely on PIP & ESA until I officially retire next year (to my meagre pension).  So here's the thing: are we really to believe, that despite our rights being systematically - often silently eroded by this Government, that they will give us the legally required 'benefit', then tell us that saving any part of it is illegal?  This is absurd nonsense and unworkable.  The state (via the tax payer) does indeed lose billions to fraud each year and this needs to be tackled: from criminal Landlords who claim HB for fake citizens - and perhaps there are Pensioners, who live in Spain and play the system etc etc.  I do play or defraud the state.  I gratefully accept the help they offer.  I cannot then be tried and convicted of a crime that isn't a crime.  Nonsense.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Anon · 8 months ago
    Where there is tyranny and overreach. Anonymous will be involved to even up th odds. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      jan evans · 8 months ago
      @Anon Oops! Of course that last line ought to have read: I do NOT play or defraud the state. :o))
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Aaron Cancer fighter · 8 months ago
    I’m a little concerned about this as I receive ESA & PIP I get the maximum as far as I know and have had to fight for this.  I have 2 cancers one which requires min of 2 surgeries a year and the other which requires chemo for life.  Anyhow to survive I’ve cut back everything I can I changed to an interest only mortgage I drive a car which is 17 years old I budget as well as I can and I was able to live within my means.  I was even able to save a little so I was able to go on the odd holiday.  Now just because I manage my income and use old hand me down phone and sim only should I be worried that I’ve built up a nice safety net totally because I don’t splurge no obviously the cost of living has hit hard mortgage deals ending means that the nest egg is going down.  Now here’s the question all the money I’ve saved is only obtained through the benefits system but because I watch my spending does that mean these savings could reduce the amount of ESA (which is only benefit this bill covers) that I get?

    Apologies for the rambling thanks for any advice 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Pickel · 8 months ago
      @Aaron Cancer fighter Lol funny!!! This kind of thing has been going on for centuries which is why we still find buried treasure lol
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Joe · 8 months ago
      @Mark How does this work so you can save your benefits up and if it goes over 6 k you are ok? And if you have residue of say 200 quid that counts as capital 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Mark · 8 months ago
      @Aaron Cancer fighter Arron - it depends on which type of ESA you are entitled to receive.  If it is Contribution Based ESA, then your savings are ignored in full ( for the purposes of your ESA). However, if it is  (legacy) Income Based ESA, then the capital rules apply. 

      Capital asset  rules do not apply to PIP.

      If you are saving your benefits , the rule DWP apply is as follows. Between the date of payment and the following due date of payment, it counts as income. Any unspent residue then becomes a capital asset. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Rodriguez · 8 months ago
      @Sara good post. Thresholds have remained the same for a long time. Hard to get out of it really.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Sara · 8 months ago
      @Aaron Cancer fighter Between £6000 and £16000 your means tested benefits are reduced by £1/week for every £250 or part of £250 over £6000. Over £16000 you are not entitled to means tested benefits but your PIP would continue. It does seem unfair if you've managed to scrape some savings from just your benefits, but as MrFibro says, we're not allowed to climb. Dwp just see that you have means above the threshold and cut the welfare.

      If having a holiday or some extra comfort helps you manage your conditions that is an allowable way to reduce your capital. Keeping £6000 should be enough to cope with emergencies and cost of living, though I think it's high time the thresholds were raised in line with benefits upratings, as they were set ages ago.
We use cookies

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential for the operation of the site, while others help us to improve this site and the user experience (tracking cookies). You can decide for yourself whether you want to allow cookies or not. Please note that if you reject them, you may not be able to use all the functionalities of the site.