With the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) currently pressing ahead with the issuing of around 83,000 migration notices per month asking income-related Employment and Support Allowance (ir-ESA)claimants to move to Universal Credit (UC), we’re taking a look at how the process is going. 

On the whole, the majority of people who received a migration notice to move from ir-ESA to UC seem to be finding their claim is going through smoothly.  If you’ve used our Managed Migration guide, you may have come up against some of the pitfalls we highlighted, but we’ve had reports from members that they’ve been able to use the information within it to challenge errors by the DWP. 

There are some issues that seem to be coming up for quite a few claimants, so we want to highlight the most common of these:

Work-related activity or support component not transferring to UC

 The component that you currently have within your ESA claim should transfer automatically to UC without any need to submit fit notes or go through a work capability assessment.  If you have the work-related activity component, this automatically becomes the Limited Capability for Work (LCW) element of UC, and the support component becomes the Limited Capability for Work and Work-Related Activity (LCWRA) element.

Whilst the DWP seem to have ironed out earlier issues where people migrating from ir-ESA were being asked to supply fit notes, many claimants have reported the LCW or LCWRA element being missing from their first UC payment. 

The underlying problem is a special form called an MGP1 that is completed by the DWP to confirm the claimant has an existing award of the work-related activity or support component that needs to be transferred to UC.  This form has to be verified by the DWP’s Move to UC team but delays in this happening, almost certainly due to the huge numbers of claims now being processed, mean that some claimants are finding the LCW or LCWRA element isn’t included in their first payment when it should be.

If this happens to you, request a mandatory reconsideration of the decision using your journal (or via the UC helpline if you have a telephone claim).  You can also make an online complaint to Universal Credit here: https://makeacomplaint.dwp.gov.uk/

Mysteriously appearing ‘New-Style’ ESA

 In the old system, there were two types of ESA: contribution-based (based on your personal national insurance contributions) and income-related (which contained premiums for special situations and was paid as a couple if you have a partner).  Only the income-related type of ESA is moving to UC.

Some people had ‘mixed’ ESA awards where they received contribution-based ESA with a ‘top-up’ of income-related ESA.  Not all claimants were aware that their award was partly made up of contribution-based ESA, so this has come as a surprise when they have moved to UC.  Contribution-based ESA automatically morphs into ‘New-Style’ ESA, which is deducted £ for £ from your UC award. 

If you are one of the people whose ESA was made up in this way, you might get payments of New-Style ESA that you weren’t expecting during the migration process and then a lower amount of UC that you thought you would (although your overall amount of benefit should be the same).

If you are unsure whether your first month’s payment of UC is correct, you can contact Citizen Advice’s Help to Claim Service (or your local advice centre) for help.

ir-ESA continues for longer than it should

When you make your claim for UC, your ESA should continue for two weeks and then stop.  This money should not affect your UC.  But some claimants have been reporting that they have received their ir-ESA for longer than these two weeks.  If this happens, the extra ir-ESA does count as income for your UC and can be deducted from your first payment.  You might spot this because it will appear as a deduction in the breakdown of your UC payment. But it can’t also be claimed back from you by ESA.  

If UC aren’t aware you have continued to receive extra ir-ESA during your first month on UC, they may not deduct it.  When they correct this later, you will have been overpaid UC in your first assessment period and that will unfortunately be recoverable from your future payments.  You can, however, negotiate the rate of repayment by contacting DWP Debt Management. 

Don’t despair!

Although we have highlighted three key problems that are arising, these are only happening for some claimants and the vast majority of people seem to be having few issues with their move.  For a more detailed guide to the migration process, do have a look at the ESA to UC Managed Migration Guide in our members’ area

And if your experience has been different, please do share in the comments section below.

Comments

Write comments...
or post as a guest
People in conversation:
Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 3 hours ago
    Does anyone know when Universal Credit reassessments will begin again. I think I heard Liz Kendall talking about this and I thought she said reassessments would start in 2026 but have can't find what she said now.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 minutes ago
      @axab43 They have already restarted Work Capability reAssessments WCA for UC and new style ESA. They are currently focusing on conditions likely to have improved. They have a massive backlog to clear. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 50 minutes ago
      @axab43 @axab43 I have been waiting for my wca since July 2017 (yes thats 8 years)and I think they are so overwhelmed with the esa migration It could well be 2026 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 5 hours ago
    it was a pointless move, a load of hassle and they dont give 2 weeks esa run on
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 hours ago
    Letter/Email written to my local MP today regarding any proposed changes to UC and PIP being passed as a money bill.

    Dear Mr #######,

    I am writing once more as a constituent to express my deep concern about reports that the Government intends to bring forward a Welfare Reform Bill — based on the Pathways to Work Green Paper — which may be drawn in such a way as to qualify for certification as a money bill under the Parliament Act 1911.

    This procedure, if used, would significantly restrict the role of the House of Lords in scrutinising or challenging the Bill. It would mean that reforms to Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment — reforms that will have profound consequences for disabled people across the country — could be passed with far less democratic oversight than is warranted.

    Although the decision to certify a bill as a money bill rests solely with the Speaker, I believe it is vital that Members of Parliament raise their voices before such a decision is made. The Speaker must be aware that there is serious concern, not just among charities and campaigners but among constituents and MPs alike, about the use of procedural mechanisms to fast-track major policy changes without adequate scrutiny.

    I have written separately to the Speaker to express these concerns. However, I now ask you, as my elected representative, to consider raising this issue directly — whether by questioning ministers, contributing to debate, or pressing for a commitment that any such legislation will be subject to full parliamentary scrutiny.

    These are not just technical matters. They go to the very heart of how fairly we treat the most vulnerable members of society. The people affected by these reforms deserve more than a procedural sleight of hand.

    Thank you for taking the time to read this. I respectfully ask that my personal contact details be treated in confidence.

    Yours sincerely,
    ###########
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 hours ago
    Letter/Email sent today to the Speaker of the House of Commons via:

    https://www.parliament.uk/business/commons/the-speaker/contact-speaker-house-of-commons/

    Copy also sent to local MP

    The Rt Hon Sir Lindsay Hoyle MP
    Speaker of the House of Commons
    House of Commons
    London
    SW1A 0AA

    Dear Mr Speaker,

    Re: Use of the Parliament Act 1911 in connection with the proposed Welfare Reform Bill

    I am writing to you in your capacity as Speaker of the House of Commons and in full recognition of your impartial and constitutional role. I write not as a political advocate but as someone deeply concerned about the integrity of parliamentary procedure.

    It has been widely reported that the Government intends to bring forward a tightly drawn Welfare Reform Bill arising from the Pathways to Work Green Paper and that it may seek to have this certified as a money bill under the Parliament Act 1911.

    As you are aware, the designation of a bill as a money bill has significant consequences for the democratic process, effectively preventing the House of Lords from offering scrutiny, challenge or amendment. While the Parliament Act 1911 rightly preserves the financial primacy of the House of Commons, it was never intended to be used to bypass full consideration of far-reaching reforms that are predominantly social, not fiscal, in character.

    The proposed changes to Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment are not minor adjustments to taxation or expenditure. They represent profound shifts in policy that will deeply affect the lives of many thousands of disabled people. To curtail debate on such a bill by using the money bill procedure would, I believe, set a troubling and damaging precedent.

    I fully understand that the power to certify a money bill rests solely with you and that no explanation is required. Nonetheless, I write in the hope that you will apply the utmost scrutiny and caution in this case, given the serious implications for both democratic accountability and public trust in Parliament.

    These are not just procedural questions — they go to the heart of how fairly and transparently our system treats those most affected by government decisions. The public deserve to know that major changes to vital support systems will not be rushed through Parliament under the guise of a technicality.

    I respectfully ask that my name and contact details be treated in confidence and not disclosed beyond your office.

    Thank you for your time and consideration.

    Yours sincerely,
    ###########
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 hours ago
      @Disy Thank you for doing this Disy.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 8 hours ago
    Rosie Jones on R4 Woman's Hour today, 17 June, from about 10:30, on benefit cuts, disablement and her new sit com, 'Pushers'. Inspirational.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 9 hours ago
    I’m still now getting replies from local councillors about the pressure on budgets that will be caused by these welfare cuts - I emailed 58 after B&W’s guidance to do so. A few are already aware and raising concerns, some stated that what I raised was ‘concerning’ and that they’d raise it with their MP even though they aren’t my local ward councillor. Some said they’re not my ward councillor, to which I replied that I think it is helpful for all councillors to be aware of the implications of this legislation on their budgets, so they can raise the issue at whatever forum/ with whoever they feel is appropriate And of course I got some ‘copy and paste’ platitudes as well. To those I sent corrections!

    If you are able, I think this is still well worth doing ASAP (at least the initial email if not replies) - guidance here:

    https://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/news/ask-local-councillors-to-grill-your-mp-about-the-green-paper-cuts

    You can just copy and paste the B&W template email or adapt it if you wish
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 12 hours ago
    My migration was relatively smooth - I was in LCWRA and that transferred over. But they asked for documents online to verify my identity - I selected two and then it seemed to glitch - and said “we’ll call you”. Then I got an appointment at the Jobcentre - I sat down and waited (it was hard enough getting there, took me two days to recover) only for the job coach at the desk next to me to telephone a number, and surprise surprise - my phone rang. I went over and he didn’t know why they’d told him it’s a phone appointment and me an in person one, he wasn’t interested in my passport or anything just their question check. 

    Then I got a letter from “new style ESA” which told me I was entitled to £150 something but that I’d get 0 because I’m on UC, they said my last payment would be £42 for the time after my last payment before the claim ended. 

    I haven’t worked in over a decade and I have never claimed and wouldn’t be eligible for new style ESA. 

    All said and done I got my first payment and I’m just going to leave it - the whole process is just mistake after mistake and I’m the one who suffers. It took me two days to recover from my trip to the Jobcentre and I had to take my medication during my interview when my alarm went off. 

    It’s done and dusted. 
    Until Labour slash the payments and make my life so much harder. I’m already in debt that’ll take months to pay off. 

    Fingers crossed for a sudden change of heart on that policy. That and my PIP keep me alive, I genuinely can’t see how I’d survive if I lost them or they were cut, or I had to attend work interviews every week. This has run me down and I’m genuinely terrified for the future. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 hours ago
    It's good to see something on the migration issue as it gives a sensible place to say this.  A few weeks back, I got a council tax bill.  Under ESA I never paid a penny.  Suddenly I'm liable for hundreds of pounds, apparently.  This is seemingly because the council is taking my transitional protection as income rather than as part of UC.  I have raised this with them, but now they have gone totally silent.  But this appears to not be an uncommon occurence, as i found this conversation on RightsNet while doing an internet search.  If you read through this, you find that the councils have been calculating incorrectly, and slowly but surely the case workers etc in the conversation are winning the argument one council at a time.  So, if you have migrated and suddenly land up with a council tax bill you never had on ESA, you need to fight it.  I'm guessing changing the council's mind is going to be a long, hard slog, but I hope to get there in the end.

    https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/Forums/viewthread/21058
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 21 hours ago

    I migrated over on the 3rd June 2025 and had my identity interview on the 6th I got an advance that I am paying up over 2 years. I was informed that I am in the no work commitments group which surprised me as I am migrating over from ESA WRAG.

    I made a claim for ADP(Pip equivalent in Scotland) from the 14th March onwards and returned from my identity interview to find the letter from Social Security Scotland confirming I have been awarded ADP.

    My question is this. Do Social Security Scotland automatically inform the DWP of a successful ADP claim?

    The letter from ESA mentions my amounts(of esa) from the 14th March to 7th April and says ADP is not counted as income so it would appear that they do.

    I have looked in the journal and can't find any mechanism for telling them or uploading documents re ADP.

    I realise that I could move up to the equivalent of ESA support group(LCWRA) but the idea of going through an immediate WCA to do so is filling me with dread . I'm just not sure I could cope with that right now as my mental and physical health has collapsed over the last few months.

    Sorry for the long post but I am so stressed about this.



    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 10 hours ago
      @James h That sounds awful.  Sounds like DWP have put you through the mill.  I hope you get placed on LCWRA.  Thanks for the reply.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 12 hours ago
      @Jonno @Jonno you got lucky their getting lcwra when you was in esa wrag group I would push for another wca right away which I’m trying to do I’m in uc lcw was in esa wrag before because dwp lost my medical notes back in 2016 had to take it couldn’t say no  but it’s a ongoing nightmare with 2-4 weekly meetings with work coach and all the razzmatazz that’s comes with that which is a complete waste of time as I’ve no cv and been unemployed for 28 years
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 hours ago
      @gingin Typical dwp sleight of hand.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    Mine went smoothly. Informed the housing department that I was migrating, same with council tax. Took 2 months grace before applying online. Very quick to fill in the form. Got a call a few days later for my identity check and passed that, so no in person check at the Job-Centre. Got my two week roll-on ESA and rent. First payment went into bank account this month. Very surprised to have no complaints about the process. I know someone who wasn't so lucky and was over-paid. This was due to them being told that the DWP would contact the council about suspending rent etc, and then didn't. They received payments during the 5 week wait. Still not told what the payments were covering.  So they are having to pay the over payment back over 6 months
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    Will Labour Really Push These Cuts Through? Don’t Be So Sure They Still Won’t Try.

    There’s been a lot of talk lately—some of it hopeful—that Labour’s plans to slash disability support might still be derailed. That decency, internal rebellion, or the Lords might intervene. But let’s be honest. We need to look this in the eye and understand the true likelihood of what’s coming.

    Labour can push these reforms through—and they probably will.

    Why? Because they’ve already calculated that they can. And they’re setting the stage to do it through a Money Bill—a rarely used parliamentary route that neuters scrutiny from the House of Lords and forces legislation through in just 30 days. If the Speaker of the House certifies it as such, there’s virtually nothing that can be done procedurally to stop it. No matter how flawed, unjust or destructive the bill is.

    But here’s the rub: these reforms don’t just involve financial adjustments. They contain structural changes—like a new PIP assessment and tightened reassessment rules—that arguably don’t qualify under the strict definition of a Money Bill. If the Speaker has integrity, they may reject the certification. But how often do we see real integrity in positions of power anymore?

    If Labour writes the bill carefully—stripping out the more contentious non-financial clauses and front-loading the fiscal elements—they could just about get it certified. And that would be that. Debate stifled. Resistance neutered. Cuts locked in.

    All of this depends on one question: does Labour want to push this through with speed and silence, or will they risk the backlash and allow full debate?

    From what we’ve seen—Liz Kendall’s empty “concessions,” Starmer’s cold-eyed detachment, Rachel Reeves' smug cruelty disguised as stability—the signs are grim. These are not people of vision or principle. These are political climbers, obsessed with fiscal signalling and desperate to prove to the City that they can “govern like grown-ups” (read: punish the poor without flinching).

    If they do this, it will be one of the most shameful betrayals in modern British politics—Labour dismantling support for the very people they once claimed to fight for. Not reform. Not modernisation. Just abandonment in a tailored suit.

    So yes, the likelihood is high. I’d put it at 70%–90%.
    It all depends on whether the Speaker plays along and whether Labour MPs grow a spine or stay in line.

    What’s left for us? Keep shouting. Keep writing. Keep reminding them: if they do this, it won’t be quietly forgotten. These reforms may pass in silence—but the consequences will be loud and long-lasting.

    As for Starmer’s Labour, the stench of betrayal will cling long after the ink dries.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 13 hours ago
      @Disy I don’t see much point in weighing up likelihoods either way. It isn’t over until it’s over and my approach from the start has been to do whatever I can to play my part in campaigning against this. Even if it looked likely the bill would be defeated (and I know we’re far from that position) we couldn’t afford to be complacent. So however likely things look one way or another, it’s just conjecture and we just need to focus on whatever steps are still open to us. One foot in front of the other. We don’t have any sway over this money bill thing so I’m not going to step on the emotional rollercoaster
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 hours ago
      @pollenpath Thanks for your reply — it’s a fair question, and I’m glad you raised it.

      You're absolutely right to want clarity on whether this can be introduced as a money bill, because it has huge implications for democratic scrutiny. The short answer is: while it’s not guaranteed, it is possible — and that’s precisely why many of us are so concerned.

      The Green Paper, as it stands, is only a consultation, but there are credible reports — including from Politico (10 June 2025) — that suggest the government is preparing to separate out the most controversial aspects (namely, the cuts to PIP and UC) into a tightly drawn bill framed purely as a financial measure. If they succeed in doing this, it could meet the technical definition of a money bill under the Parliament Acts.

      And that matters. Because if it’s classed as a money bill, the House of Lords — which would normally offer detailed scrutiny, debate and expert challenge — would be powerless to stop it. It could pass into law within just one month, regardless of opposition.

      We’ve seen tactics like this before. Welfare reform has been smuggled through the back door more than once, using procedural loopholes and obscure technicalities. This wouldn’t be new — but it would be devastating.

      So no, we don’t yet know if it will happen. But based on what’s being leaked and briefed to the press, we have every reason to suspect that it could — and we’d be naïve not to prepare for that.

      Don’t shoot the messenger.
      I’m not claiming certainty, but raising a warning based on precedent, evidence and a pattern we’ve seen far too many times.

      Prepare yourself for the worst. Don’t expect kindness from these idiots. They’re not in the business of fairness, compassion or justice — they’re in the business of cuts, spin and control.

      And that’s why we — all of us — need to get a grip on ourselves.

      This is not the time for silence, defeatism or relying on others to do the work. Those that can should write those letters to your MP. Join the think tanks, the forums, the advocacy groups. Share your experience, your outrage, your insight. Raise your voice in any space that might carry it.

      Because if we don’t speak up now, they’ll assume we’ve consented. And once this door is opened, it won’t be closed again easily.

      No one else is coming to save us — we are it.

      So do your bit. However small it may seem, it matters. It all matters.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 hours ago
      @Disy This isn't over by a long shot. I predict the backlash will be immense. However I do think the Green Paper will get through. Will their be a U turn? Who knows. If anyone thought the WFA debacle was bad, this is going to much worse. I think any MP who votes these proposals through will be seeking alternative employment come the next GE. The electorate will not forget.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 hours ago
      @Disy I don't buy into your doubts on the integrity of the speaker here.  With one exception, he's never really given any sign that he doesn't have it, and has often ruled against the government - whichever party that might be.  As far as I'm aware, Labour can't "present it" as a money bill, the speak simply decided one way or the other once all of the amendments etc have been voted on, as they can change the state of the bill in a significant way.  

      From what I've read, this probably won't be classed as a money bill.  The inclusion of changes to eligibility rules themselves should prevent that.   If that is the case, then we actually have some real hope, as the final votes won't take place until after it's been to the Lords and play parliamentary ping-pong.  By that point, more impact assessments might be public and will affect the final vote in all likelihood.   That delay might also, if we're lucky, push the introduction of the changes back a few months even if it does get through.  

      I realise why people are pessimistic.  I am, too.  But there is still hope - and if the govt doesn't know if this counts as a money bill or not, I'm pretty sure we as members of the forum don't either. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 22 hours ago
      @Disy The electorate didn’t forgive Nick Clegg, and looked what happened to the Lib Dem’s after the coalition.

      People don’t learn.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    I have been on uc since 01st of march and on my 4th statement now everything went ok and got my first payment after 5 weeks although did have a problem with the housing element overall it is a stricter crueler heartless system than esa getting paid monthly I still struggle with it and  being in the lcw work activity group doesnt help with monthly interviews with a work coach but awaiting wca to hopefully get into lcwra next time around 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    From DPAC on Bluesky:

    BBC NW reporter Kevin Fitzpatrick would like to contact disabled people who would be up for speaking to him about the imminent cuts to PIP how they could be affected and why they need their PIP

    Kevin Fitzpatrick
    , BBC Radio Mancs & Politics North West
    Tel: 07801 741 070
    @kevfitz21
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    I have to migrate over by the end of july hoping I went have any of the problems above fingers crossed!. With it going smoothly for the majority at least that is a little bit of good news with what's going on at the moment with the cuts
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    I think this over flatters the dwp from my experience, which has included all the above problems, but the data matching  of my rent allowed by the council on legacy benefits,  provided by the council has caused another problem. The council provided a rent figure to UC, that was out of date, and not the day before the migration that it should have been. This meant the transitional protection was lower than it otherwise should have been. I’ve offered every bit of evidence known to man or beast, but they will only accept what they have from the council. Also they refuse to accept a mandatory reconsideration on the matter. It’s literally like torture! The council agree with me, but say they don’t have a communication channel to speak to UC. I’ve sent a paper based reconsideration in, as it’s all I can think of. Speak as I find, not that easy, and I thought I was well prepared having read up on it!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 hours ago
      @R Same here regarding my rent. My benefits have reduced by £100 a month because of this mistake. So much for 'transitional protection'. I've tried everything to correct this 'mistake' but the DWP just won't listen. And in future years I can look forward to my benefits reducing by £173 as the 'transitional protection' is eroded away. The government wants to reduce the benefits bill, and it's us legitimate claimants who suffer.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @R I think we are seeing first hand why periodically we see " The DWP has underpaid X number of people Y benefit" and in this case somewhere down the line a LOT of people are owed transitional protection. They stuffed mine up but luckily my carer has worked far higher up the civil service than any useless bugger in the DWP can imagine. I only wish I hadn't had to watch so many people in the 2013 era succumb to despair and Sui - including a relative. calculated, incompetent and callous are a very bad combination 

Free PIP, ESA & UC Updates!

Delivered Fortnightly

Over 110,000 claimants and professionals subscribe to the UK's leading source of benefits news.

 
iContact