Millions of benefit claimants could be in line for a pay-out due to a landmark court case taking place. A number of benefit claimants have taken the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to court over alleged discriminatory extra payments handed out during the Covid pandemic.
In March 2020 the UK government announced a £20 per week increase to the universal credit standard allowance basic element worth up to £1,040 a year for those facing hardship due to the Covid-19 pandemic. The uplift was discontinued in October 2021, prompting fears that would send millions into financial trouble.
While the £20 uplift was given to those on UC - around 5.7 million people in the UK - it was not added to legacy benefits such as income support, housing benefit and child tax credit. It meant around 2.6 million people were estimated to have lost out on the pandemic top-up.
But in February a group of claimants launched a legal bid over the two-tier system which was described as "unlawful discrimination" against those on legacy benefits, CambridgeshireLive reports. The DWP is aiming to move everyone on these benefits over to UC by 2024.
The campaigners' claim was rejected by a High Court judge despite the admission it was “obvious” some would face “severe hardship." But in December the case returned to the Court of Appeal where it was narrowed down to a slimmer range of dates. Originally, the claimants argued the whole 18-month policy was discrimination, which could have led to £1,500 of back payments.
But they have now asked judges to rule the policy was unlawful in its final nine months from January 8, 2021 after the DWP argued it was impossible to raise legacy benefits as fast as universal credit due to old computer systems. If the campaigners win, the department would not necessarily have to give everyone back payments, but it would be likely that at least some partial back payments would happen. An extra £20 per week for the duration of the nine month period in question would add up to £720.
Jamie Burton KC, for the four claimants, accepted there clearly were some technical problems at first. But he told the court the DWP should have acted within 18 months, and "we don't accept that for the duration of the measure" A trio of Appeal Court judges will give their ruling in the coming weeks or months. You can get more cost-of-living news and money stories straight to your inbox by subscribing to our newsletter here.
READ NEXT:
