Good morning

I first wrote about this topic in November 2020.  Since then, several changes have occurred that should, in theory, assist claimants who are paid two monthly salaries in the same month, but in practice, the issue recurs all too frequently.

When the regulations were first introduced, claimants generally had to ask for a manual adjustment. However, DWP confirmed in August 2021 that the “monthly‑paid fix” had been automated, using HMRC Real Time Information (RTI) to move one set of earnings into the correct AP (assessment period) where two calendar‑monthly wages appear.

The regulations do not apply where the claimant is paid weekly, fortnightly or four‑weekly. In these cases, UC law still permits more than one wage to be counted in a single AP, even where this causes hardship or rent arrears. This remains a significant gap in protection and has not been remedied by DWP or the courts

A major clarification came from the Upper Tribunal in JN v SSWP (UC) [2023] UKUT 49 (AAC).

The Tribunal confirmed that:

  • The Court of Appeal’s declaration in Johnson (the case of the four ladies mentioned in my earlier bulletin) was binding, not merely advisory
  • DWP was required to act in conformity with that declaration
  • Claimants can challenge pre‑November 2020 UC decisions where two monthly salaries were wrongly counted, even though the regulations had not yet changed.

In other words, where historic rent arrears or overpayments can be traced back to nil UC awards caused by dual wages before 16 November 2020, tenants may still have grounds for:

  • Late Mandatory Reconsideration
  • Appeal (with reasons for delay)
  • Revision where an error of law is identified.

What should frontline staff look out for now?

Warning signs

  • UC statement shows two “PAYE earnings” entries in a single AP
  • Housing Costs Element reduced or removed unexpectedly causing NIL award.
  • Tenant reports pay dates moved due to bank holidays or Christmas/New Year
  • UC online account shows“Nil award” despite claimant receiving only his/her ordinary earnings

What action should be taken?

  1. Confirm the tenant is genuinely paid calendar‑monthly, not four‑weekly.
  2. The tenant should ask for re‑allocation of earnings by posting a note on their journal as soon as they realise a mistake is likely to occur.
  3. Errors are easier to correct before the AP closes but can still be addressed afterwards.

For example:

Dear Decision Maker,

I am normally paid calendar‑monthly, on the last Friday of the month. However, in December, my employer made two salary payments within the Assessment Period (AP) due to payroll timing adjustments (Christmas holidays). These payments relate to December and January, i.e., two separate monthly pay periods and should be treated as such.

In accordance with the post‑16 November 2020 UC earnings regulations and the principles confirmed in SSWP v Johnson and JN v SSWP, I ask that earnings be allocated to the correct Assessment Period. If required, my employer can provide a letter confirming this information.

If DWP refuse to make the necessary adjustment:

    • Request a Mandatory Reconsideration
    • Email the local Service Leader/Practice Manager
    • Consider referral for specialist welfare rights advice

I hope this all makes sense, but if you need further clarification, please get in touch bill@ucadvice.co.uk or phone 07733 080 389.

Regards

Bill Irvine

UC Advice & Advocacy Ltd