Flaws in the digital universal credit system breach principles of law and stop some claimants from accessing the right level of support

New research from CPAG also warns that claimants who are entitled to additional elements or exceptions from standard rules, such as those with health conditions or disabilities, carers and care leavers, are more likely to be negatively affected

Flaws in the digital universal credit system are breaching principles of law and stopping some claimants from accessing the right level of support, a new report from the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) has found.

In You reap what you code: universal credit, digitalisation and the rule of law, CPAG focuses on the digitalisation of universal credit and the extent to which the digital system adheres to rule of law principles of transparency, procedural fairness and lawfulness. By examining evidence gathered from a range of sources – including cases reported by welfare rights advisers to CPAG’s Early Warning System, interviews with claimants, freedom of information (FOI) requests, and online forums such as the rightsnet discussion forum – the report identifies recurrent issues and areas for improvement in the universal credit digital system.

Summarising the key message from the three-year study, CPAG highlights that –

'… while the digital nature of the benefit has some advantages for universal credit claimants, the way the digital systems have been designed also leads to people being left without money they are entitled to and information they need in order to challenge DWP decisions. In the worst cases claimants are forced into acute hardship because the programming and operation of this digital- by-design benefit does not align with social security legislation.'

Among examples of the injustices and breaches of rule-of-law principles identified in the research are that –

The digital claim form does not ask all the right questions

For example, claimants under the age of 35 renting in the private sector will generally receive the shared accommodation rate of local housing allowance (LHA) but there are exceptions to this – such as for claimants with certain rates of disability benefits – who will receive a higher rate. However, the online claims process does not ask claimants whether they meet any of these conditions. Instead, the DWP expects claimants to understand the complexities of the housing cost element regulations and self-identify if they think an exception applies to them.

CPAG highlights that –

'This breaches the rule-of-law principle of procedural fairness and is a failure of the duty to make reasonable enquiries. What’s more, by failing to ask all the relevant questions, the universal credit system systematically discriminates against groups entitled to additional support – the very same groups who by definition are often the most vulnerable and at risk of discrimination because of their extra needs.'

In addition, CPAG flags up how the digital claim fails to ask claimants what date they want to claim from – even though backdating by up to one month is possible if a claimant 'could not reasonably be expected to make the claim earlier' for reasons including having a disability, or a system failure – noting that –

'This leaves some claimants who are eligible for backdating – mostly people with health conditions or disabilities – without money they are entitled to. CPAG wants claim forms amended to ask all claimants if they require backdating or want to claim from an earlier date.'

All the children in a family are deprived of support if only one child’s details cannot be verified

The digital system is unable to accept the verification of individual children independently of other children in a household with the result that families are missing out on their legal entitlement to the child element of universal credit for all of their children if there is a problem with providing evidence to verify just one child in a family

Digital systems can’t accept advance claims despite regulations permitting them

While claims can be made up to one month in advance ahead of a prisoner’s release from custody and by care leavers in advance of their 18th birthday, and legislation enables these groups to make a claim while still being supported by the prison service or local authority, CPAG says that, in practice, the digital universal credit system does not accept these claims.

Claimants lose access to information they need

CPAG's findings include two examples where this impacts claimants –

  • when an award is changed from an earlier date, the payment statement in a claimant’s online account is automatically updated to display only the new decision. Claimants then have insufficient information to identify whether any overpayments or underpayments have been calculated correctly; and
  • claimants who previously received universal credit and then make a new claim also lose all access to their previous online journal -which is only then available by contacting the universal credit helpline, applying for a subject access request, or waiting for the information to be reproduced in appeal paperwork if they challenge the decision.

Moving on to set out what needs to be done to address these and the other examples of the injustice caused by system design flaws, CPAG calls for the DWP to be more transparent about its automated and clerical decision making processes, including by making information available in relation to the system design and Departmental guidance to staff on its use.

In addition, in relation to the individual system flaws identified in the research, CPAG sets out its 'top ten' recommendations for actions to be taken by the DWP –

  1. Update the universal credit claim process to ask all relevant questions and fully investigate claimant circumstances and entitlement.
  2. Amend the appeals notice in universal credit to accurately reflect claimants’ appeal rights.
  3. Update the payment statement to provide further information to claimants about how their award has been calculated.
  4. As a minimum, delay freezing journals for at least one month after closure of a claim to allow claimants time to apply for a mandatory reconsideration
  5. Introduce a ‘request a mandatory reconsideration’ function on the universal credit journal to help claimants exercise their appeal rights.
  6. Original and amended statements should be made available for comparison.
  7. Amend the digital claim process to allow for advance claims.
  8. Remove the concept of claim closure from systems, processes and guidance to ensure language is accurate and reflects the legal framework.
  9. Undertake a review of the information provided to claimants in decision letters, with the aim of providing more adequate explanations for decisions.
  10. Make the source code for the universal credit digital system publicly available as is required by the Government Digital Service’s service standards.

CPAG’s head of policy and research Sophie Howes said today –

'At its best, digitised universal credit makes it easier to claim. But at worst, it rides roughshod over rule-of-law principles and leaves claimants without enough money to live on. Try telling a mother of three that the computer says No to support for all of her children just because there’s a bureaucratic delay in the paperwork for one child. The DWP must take the wraps off universal credit so that its workings are transparent. There are low-cost changes the department can make to ensure digitalisation improves universal credit so that it’s fair, in line with regulations and capable of getting correct payments to all claimants. Almost half of children will be in households claiming universal credit when it’s fully rolled out, so getting it right is imperative.'

For more information, see Digital universal credit system breaches principles of law and stops claimants accessing support from cpag.org.uk