Claimants for UC could be interviewed by phone and asked to give 4 months worth of bank statements

Claimants for UC could be interviewed by phone and asked to give 4 months worth of bank statements. See this forum thread:

https://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/forum/10-dla-esa-queries-results/146220-universal-credit-review-experience

Quote from someone in the thread:

"I recently came up for a Universal Credit review and found there wasn't much comprehensive testimony regarding the process online, so I thought I'd write it up for future anxious people googling!

On 14th May I got a message reading the following in my journal: "Hi [name], We are reviewing your Universal Credit claim to make sure your payments are correct. As part of the review, we are creating to-dos for you to complete. These to-dos must be completed by 28.05.24 or your Universal Credit payments will be affected."

The to-dos were to upload 4 months of statements from my current account (the bank account my Universal Credit is paid into) and a copy of my ID (I chose to upload a photo of my passport, and I was asked to upload a photo of me holding up the photo page of the passport too), which I did the same day.

On 5th June (three-ish weeks later) I received a message in my journal, an email, and a text informing me of a phone appointment for the 13th June. I was given a specific time for the appointment, and the name of the person who would be taking it. I was told to ensure I had all documentation I'd provided (so the bank statements) to hand for the call, and that the call might take up to 30 minutes.

A week before the appointment and 24 hours before the appointment I got further text and email reminders.

Today (13th June) the call came at the specific time given (bang on time). I was told some details about my Universal Credit claim, and asked the security questions I set up when I first applied for Universal Credit. I had a script read to me which basically sums up to 'we're recording this call, we're doing this review to see if you're getting the right amount of money'. The person told me they were going to ask me if I had various financial products and proceeds, and that I just needed to say yes or no. She said that if I hadn't heard of something, I most likely didn't have it.

She ran through a BUNCH of different financial products - other debit accounts, stocks, shares, ISAs, savings accounts, property, proceeds from sale of property, a PayPal account, a Monzo or Revolut account, and other things I can't remember.

She then asked me about a specific person that I send money to and receive money from sometimes - she read off their bank number, so I was glad I had the bank statements directly in front of me to refer to and see who it was and what the context was. She confirmed it was fine and explicitly said they don't care what money is spent on and it was just to check it wasn't another account belonging to myself.

As I have PayPal and a couple of ISAs, she told me she'd set up to-dos in my Universal Credit journal to submit data relating to them - a PayPal statement covering the same period as the bank statements (which can be downloaded directly from PayPal with a custom date range quite easily), and proof of the amount in my ISAs. She gave me opportunity to ask questions, and the call ended.

It took under 10 minutes and was probably the most neutral and non-upsetting call I've ever had with thw DWP!

The to-dos appeared in my journal IMMEDIATELY, and because I'd expected them to ask, I was able to submit the documentation instantly. The ISAs are with a bank who only do once-yearly statements for ISAs and can't provide present-day ones on request, so I submitted a screenshot of the app showing the amount of money in the ISAs as my proof. A note also appeared on my journal confirming that I'd attended the appointment.

About an hour and a half later, I got a message on my journal reading "Your Universal Credit Claim Review is now complete. Following our interview, and the information you provided, we can confirm there is no change to your Universal Credit."

For anyone worrying, I'd say that this process is genuinely not something to worry about. I literally vomited with anxiety before the call - I don't do well with calls, and I was scared I'd be criticised for how I spend my money or incessantly questioned about financial gifts PayPal'd over by friends, but it was very light and business-like, no discussion of that at all. If you're called up for a review, I'd recommend:

-Downloading your PayPal statement for the period covered by the bank statements before the phone interview
-Have evidence ready for other accounts, like ISAs. (They explicitly told me they don't look at credit cards, so you don't need to worry about credit card statements)
-Keep the statements directly in front of you during the call, and if you have lots of bank transfers in and out without a name attached, write a list out of bank numbers and the person associated with them so you can confidently answer if asked 'Who do you have lots of transactions between your account and account number 123456789?'

Good luck, and I hope this helps someone! It's the sort of detailed break-down I wish I'd been able to find in one place when I got the initial review message, so hopefully it helps someone "

My guess is up to £x they don't really care as long as you have an alibi, ie it was a loan and you've taken a few out recently. Beyond £X they will decide whether to treat as income, then you argue. Add a zero after that, and you're under more serious investigation.

I wouldn't be complacent about this. They certainly do care if you fail to disclose capital over the thresholds or income. Remember, in benefits law, capital and income have a particular meaning. When you claim a benefit you agree to inform them of income and capital over the limits and to repay any overpayments.

If you receive a means tested benefit, once your total capital for the relevant assessment period is £6,000 or more, the claimant is responsible for informing the DWP and they will reduce benefits accordingly. Once a person has capital in excess of £16,000, no more means tested benefits, until capital is below £16,000.

There are some time limited disregards, such as backdated benefits, but I'm not aware loans are disregarded.

yes as Ignatius says. I think fines are added where fraud is involved with interest too. This is why when people carry on regardless for years, and then in they come and, wham! Pay back time. Recent cases even with pensioners  when caring for their elderly parents. They didn't care that they were actually saving the state thousands in care fees, and chased them for the over-payment regardless due to being pennies above savings/income threshold. Its insanity at its very best. Anything above £6000 in singular or combined  savings accounts, needs reporting or

They dont appear to make clear the criteria at application stage or even after. Who the hell really wants to be reading through 100s of pages of their boring fact sheets.If it's really important they should have it all clear as day big red caps on page one. YOU NEED TO DECLARE THIS...now! proceed with your claim sheep. I also know someone who did inform them of all their financial affairs and they recorded it completely incorrectly.What a surprise. Welcome to look at me, as I currently have £145 in my account. And zero in savings accounts. Those days, are over.

On the subject of savings, for those who are unaware, the government Help to Save scheme is regarded as a good thing for getting people into the savings habit. You can save a maximum of £50 a month for 4 years. The bonuses based on what you have saved are impressive - if you save the maximum of £2,400 over 4 years you get £1200 in bonus.

The problem is only people on tax credits and some UC claimants can have a Help to Save account. Obviously tax credits are now extinct, and if you are on UC you have to be earning nearly £800 a month to have a Help to Save account so limiting the number of people who can benefit.

The bigger problem is the combination of measly benefits and high living costs make it very,very difficult/impossible for people to save, but everyone on UC should be able to open an account.

https://www.gov.uk/get-help-savings-low-income

Totally agree Ignatius, People are fed up of being forced to live on a very low existence in one of the richest countries in the world.Only its the 1%, who owns 70% of the wealth. There's a surprise.

Here, here jobber.

I am fortunate to have some modest savings. When stuff needs replacing it's far less stressful knowing I don't have to get a Budgeting Loan or get high interest credit.

Revolution would be my first choice. In the meantime HMRC should extend Help to Save to all UC claimants, not just those earning nearly £800 pm. Yes, it's of no use to people who really can't save anything, but even if someone could only afford to save a quid a week, the value of the Help to Save bonus teaches a bit about the value of saving. Like they say, money begets money.

i'm truly stunned Ignatius that they have let things get this bad. It's a terrible situation for those needing to/having to work. Very few must be living a normal life now, and personal debt has yet to rear its ugly head, but thats coming bigtime in the shape of many personal bankruptcies' and IVA's off the scale,IMO. How else have people half way through their mortgages managed to survive after redundancies etc, and in some cases, repeatedly so. I think it will be years before many see any real turnaround. Meantime, landlords can carry on raising rents regardless keeping many far away from the realms of work and being able to save a penny.They have totally disincentivized and demoralised people. Mission accomplished.Give themselves a carrot and us...the stick.

Try to bear in mind the wealthy, and powerful truly have us all by the balls (or boobs..or whatever female bodypart begins with 'B' and can be effectively used in detaining her).

On several fronts, this new(ish) Labour government has already been humbled by harsh power dynamics into backing off from several pledges.  Most irritating for me was that Rayner womans "We'll ban all no-fault evictions on Day 1".

I am possibly looking at an enormous rent increase from a Landlord who owns over a dozen residential and commercial properties, his own lobby darkly warned the incoming govt that if they carried out their promise/threat, half of them would sell to nesters, thus adding to already shooting rental prices another zero.

Bear in mind, this lobby comprises landlords who own anything from 1 to 35 houses, per landlord.  They would have NO problem with selling 2 million homes to the nester sector over half a year....because they know the government can't even get 2 million homes built over the next half a decade. These are the same people who have no problem weaponising their enhanced finances to hoard all these millions of units of housing stock and ransom them for rent.