People on benefits need to report these changes to DWP to avoid overpayment and £50 penalty
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) now pays benefits to around 23.7 million people across the UK. However, many of those claimants may be unaware that they need to report changes in their circumstances to ensure they keep getting the right amount of financial support.
Failing to notify the relevant DWP department 'straight away' could result in a claim being paused, stopped or reduced. Guidance on GOV.UK states: 'If you do not report a change or a mistake, you might be paid too much. If you are, you might have to pay some of the money back. You might also have to pay a £50 penalty.'
It also warns: 'If you deliberately do not report changes, you're committing benefit fraud.'
Changes you need to report
According to the official guidance, changes to be reported can include:
changing your name or gender
finding or finishing a job, or working different hours
your income going up or down
starting or stopping education, training or an apprenticeship
moving house
people moving into or out of the place you live (for example your partner, a child or lodger)
the death of your partner or someone you live with
having a baby
starting or stopping caring for someone
getting married or divorced
starting or ending a civil partnership
planning to go abroad for any length of time
going into hospital, a care home or sheltered accommodation
any changes to your medical condition or disability
changing your doctor
changes to your pension, savings, investments or property
changes to other money you get (for example student loans or grants, sick pay or money you get from a charity)
changes to the benefits you or anyone else in your house gets
you or your partner getting back-pay (sometimes called 'arrears') for salary or earnings you're owed
changes to your immigration status, if you're not a British citizen
It adds: 'If you claim Child Benefit you also need to report changes to your child's circumstances.'
Reporting a death
If you need to report the death of someone who has been receiving the State Pension or benefits, you can use the 'Tell Us Once' service - find out more here.
How to report a change
Typically, you should contact the relevant department responsible for administering and delivering your benefit. It's also important to remember that if you get more than one benefit, you need to tell each department separately about the change.
Universal Credit - Report changes using your Universal Credit online account if you have one or contact the Universal Credit helpline
Pension Credit - Call the Pension Service helpline or report changes by post
Attendance Allowance - Call the Attendance Allowance helpline
Disability benefits - Call the Disability Service Centre to report changes if you get Disability Living Allowance (DLA), or Personal Independence Payment (PIP)
Carer's Allowance - Report a change online or call the Carer's Allowance Unit
Housing Benefit - Report a change to your local council
Child Benefit - Report changes using the Child Benefit online service or call or write to the Child Benefit Office
All other benefits - Report changes by calling Jobcentre Plus, you will need to have your National Insurance number when you call
Full details with direct links to each department can be found on GOV.UK here.
Earlier this week, DWP Transformation Minister Andrew Western, branded data revealing more than £9 billion in benefit overpayments due to fraud and error as 'staggering'.
The latest official statistics said the total rate of benefit expenditure overpaid in the year to the end of March was £9.5 billion - with fraud accounting for most of that sum.
However, the new figures from the DWP also show that over the same period, an estimated £1.2 billion was underpaid in benefits.
Fraud accounted for £6.5 billion of the total overpayments figure in the year to March, down from £7.3 billion a year earlier.
Claimant error was up year-on-year, accounting for £1.9 billion in the year to March, from £1.6 billion the previous year, while overpayments because of official error also rose to £1 billion from £0.8 billion the previous year.
DWP said people under-declaring their earnings remained the main cause of fraud overpayments, followed by benefits claimants failing to declare living with a partner, and thirdly people under-declaring their financial assets or capital.
The Department said it was able to recover some £1.1 billion of overpayments in the past year - £0.4 billion in Housing Benefit and the same amount in Universal Credit.
In a written statement published alongside the figures on Thursday, Mr Western said: 'This Government made a manifesto commitment that it will safeguard taxpayers' money and not tolerate fraud or waste anywhere in public services.
'With welfare benefits paid to around 24 million people, the welfare system is a deliberate target for both organised crime groups and opportunistic individuals and it is vital that the Government continues to robustly tackle fraud to ensure support goes to those who need it most.
'We are taking further steps to minimise error, ensuring the right people are paid the right amount at the right time.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Guardian
3 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Bank of England could cut base rate if jobs market continues to slow
Businesses are 'adjusting employment' as a result of Chancellor Rachel Reeves' decision to raise national insurance contributions (NICs) for employers, the governor of the Bank also told The Times. Companies are 'also having pay rises that are possibly less than they would have been if the NICs change hadn't happened', Mr Bailey said. In an interview with the newspaper, the governor said the British economy was growing behind its potential. This could open up 'slack' to bring down inflation, he said, meaning prices on goods would rise less swiftly compared with earnings in future. Mr Bailey said he believes the base rate set by the Bank of England would be lowered in future, after it was held in June. The current Bank rate of 4.25%, which has a bearing on all lending in the UK – including mortgages – will be reviewed again on August 7 by the Bank's Monetary Policy Committee. 'I really do believe the path is downward,' Mr Bailey told The Times. He added: 'But we continue to use the words 'gradual and careful' because… some people say to me 'why are you cutting when inflation's above target?'' The governor's indication that lower lending rates and reduced inflation could be around the corner comes as the Government is facing pressure to improve living standards. Ms Reeves' tax and spend plans are also being constrained by the current borrowing costs, as well as downgraded growth forecasts. The Chancellor's fiscal headroom has been in part eroded by U-turns on the winter fuel payment and welfare reforms, as well as global shocks to the British economy. Some in the Labour Party, including former leader Lord Neil Kinnock and Wales's First Minister Baroness Eluned Morgan, are calling for a wealth tax to help bolster the public finances. On Sunday, Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander said such a tax had not been 'directly' discussed when ministers held an away day at the end of last week. But speaking to Sky News' Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips programme, she would not rule out tax rises at the autumn budget, only saying tax decisions would be made based on 'fairness'.
South Wales Guardian
3 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Financial ombudsman rebuked by MPs over handling of ex-chief's ‘dismissal'
In a report published on Monday, the Commons Treasury Committee criticised Baroness Manzoor for declining to answer its questions about the ousting of Abby Thomas from her role in February. The peer and chairwoman had been asked by MPs to explain why Ms Thomas had stepped down from her role as chief executive of the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) and whether any severance package was agreed. She declined to do so, saying only that the move had been a 'mutual agreement' and citing her 'duties to safeguard the wellbeing of our employees' and 'protect the interests' of the ombudsman service. In a letter to the committee on February 19, Baroness Manzoor claimed that 'as a member of the House of Lords, I cannot be required either to attend before the committee, or or to answer its questions,' the report says. In Monday's report, MPs said that 'although this argument was strictly true' because Commons committees have no power to compel the Lords, 'it was unnecessary and disrespectful'. Following Baroness Manzoor's letter, the committee ordered the FOS to submit details of any severance deal or financial package and any confidentiality or non-disclosure agreement negotiated between the service and Ms Thomas. Although the FOS complied with the order, the committee has not published the details, claiming its decision not to do so reflects 'our awareness of the need to balance transparency against fairness to individuals.' In its report, the committee sums up the reason for Ms Thomas' dismissal as a 'collapse in confidence' driven by 'fundamental disagreements' over strategy and operations between the board and the former chief executive. 'This collapse in confidence covered a broad range of issues and was not driven by a single event or topic,' it says. 'The mutual collapse in confidence led the FOS Board to dismiss Abby Thomas.' Treasury Committee chairwoman Dame Meg Hillier said the service's failure to block Commons scrutiny should send a 'clear message' to others seeking to frustrate the process. 'I'm afraid that the handling of this situation by the senior leadership of the Financial Ombudsman Service has been deeply disappointing,' she said. 'The attempt to frustrate a House of Commons Committee from scrutinising the actions of a publicly accountable organisation ultimately proved unsuccessful. 'I hope this sends a clear message to any organisation considering similar action in future that Members of the House of Commons will have answers to the questions they ask on behalf of the British public, whether senior officials attempt to block them or not.' Baroness Manzoor said: 'I highly value the Treasury Select Committee and the important role it plays in holding the financial sector to account. 'I am committed to providing open and transparent evidence to the committee, but there are rare instances when that can be difficult – particularly when it relates to employment matters. 'I have always treated the committee with the utmost seriousness and respect, and I know the Financial Ombudsman Service will continue to work closely with them in the future.'
Glasgow Times
3 hours ago
- Glasgow Times
Financial ombudsman rebuked by MPs over handling of ex-chief's ‘dismissal'
In a report published on Monday, the Commons Treasury Committee criticised Baroness Manzoor for declining to answer its questions about the ousting of Abby Thomas from her role in February. The peer and chairwoman had been asked by MPs to explain why Ms Thomas had stepped down from her role as chief executive of the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) and whether any severance package was agreed. She declined to do so, saying only that the move had been a 'mutual agreement' and citing her 'duties to safeguard the wellbeing of our employees' and 'protect the interests' of the ombudsman service. In a letter to the committee on February 19, Baroness Manzoor claimed that 'as a member of the House of Lords, I cannot be required either to attend before the committee, or or to answer its questions,' the report says. In Monday's report, MPs said that 'although this argument was strictly true' because Commons committees have no power to compel the Lords, 'it was unnecessary and disrespectful'. Following Baroness Manzoor's letter, the committee ordered the FOS to submit details of any severance deal or financial package and any confidentiality or non-disclosure agreement negotiated between the service and Ms Thomas. Although the FOS complied with the order, the committee has not published the details, claiming its decision not to do so reflects 'our awareness of the need to balance transparency against fairness to individuals.' In its report, the committee sums up the reason for Ms Thomas' dismissal as a 'collapse in confidence' driven by 'fundamental disagreements' over strategy and operations between the board and the former chief executive. 'This collapse in confidence covered a broad range of issues and was not driven by a single event or topic,' it says. 'The mutual collapse in confidence led the FOS Board to dismiss Abby Thomas.' Treasury Committee chairwoman Dame Meg Hillier said the service's failure to block Commons scrutiny should send a 'clear message' to others seeking to frustrate the process. 'I'm afraid that the handling of this situation by the senior leadership of the Financial Ombudsman Service has been deeply disappointing,' she said. 'The attempt to frustrate a House of Commons Committee from scrutinising the actions of a publicly accountable organisation ultimately proved unsuccessful. 'I hope this sends a clear message to any organisation considering similar action in future that Members of the House of Commons will have answers to the questions they ask on behalf of the British public, whether senior officials attempt to block them or not.' Baroness Manzoor said: 'I highly value the Treasury Select Committee and the important role it plays in holding the financial sector to account. 'I am committed to providing open and transparent evidence to the committee, but there are rare instances when that can be difficult – particularly when it relates to employment matters. 'I have always treated the committee with the utmost seriousness and respect, and I know the Financial Ombudsman Service will continue to work closely with them in the future.'
