63218 Martin Williams v3 Appendix A.pdf

APPENDIX A

AT Charter Instructions – Decision Making Steps
A.
Introduction

1.  These  instructions  should  be  read  together  with  the  ‘Claimants  with  Pre-Settled  Status
making  a  claim  to  Universal  Credit’  noticeboard  post  (link)  and  deal  with  the  particular
circumstances arising out of the outcome of the lead Upper Tribunal case of SSWP v AT (AIRE
Centre and IMA Intervening) [2022] UKUT 330 (AAC) (“AT”) and the possible invoking of the
SSWP’s staying of decision-making power.

2.  Section 25 of the Social Security Act 1998 permits the Secretary of State not to make a decision
on a claim for benefit that is before him if there is an appeal in other lead case pending. AT is
such a lead case pending and due to be heard in March 2023 in the Court of Appeal. Nothing
in  these  instructions  is  to  be  read  as  being  the  same  as  any  existing  UC  hardship
considerations,  e.g.,  sanctions,  advance  payments  etc.    These  instructions  are  unique  to
dealing with the AT decision.

B.
Steps for decision makers

3.  Claimants without Pre-Settled Status are not affected by the AT decision in any way and so
are not covered by these instructions.

4.  For claimants with Pre-Settled Status who meet the HRT, they should be managed as follows:
i.
In all cases, a DM must consider each claim under BAU HRT rules.
ii.
This  means  that  all  UC  claims,  both  from  single  and  joint  claimants,  should  firstly
proceed for an HRT assessment in the usual way.
iii.
This also applies to all changes of circumstances received after 12 December 2022
which potentially affect the claimant’s existing right to reside.
iv.
If the claimant/both partners pass the HRT, the UC claim/existing award continues on
this basis.
v.
For cases at mandatory reconsideration stage, if the original HRT refusal decision is
overturned, the claim for UC is awarded in the usual way. If the original HRT refusal
is maintained but the claimant is now found to be able to pass the HRT, the UC claim
proceeds from when the HRT was met.

5.  For claimants with Pre-Settled Status who are found not to meet the HRT, they should be
managed as follows:



(1) The case of AT does not apply, and the claim proceeds for HRT refusal for:

i.
Claimants  whose  decisions  relate  to  entitlement  for  periods  before  12  December
2022;

ii.
Claimants who are non-EU national claimants, including those from Norway, Iceland,
Liechtenstein and Switzerland; or

1

iii.
EU nationals not in scope of the Withdrawal Agreement at the end of the transition
period meaning that they did not exercise a Treaty right such as being a worker (or a
family member), self-employed person (or a family member), a job seeker, a student,
being within the initial 3 months of arrival in the UK, being self-sufficient or having a
retained or derived residence right before 31 December 2020.

(2) The case of AT does apply, and so the claim proceeds as follows:

i.
For  EU  national  claimants,  firstly  it  should  be  assessed  if  they  are  able  to  work,
pursuant  to  paragraphs  6-10.  For  EU  nationals  able  to  work,  the  claim  should  be
disallowed as the claimant does not meet the threshold set out in the AT case.

ii.
For EU national claimants who are assessed as unable to work and where there is no
evidence of hardship, the decision to refuse on HRT grounds should now be stayed.

iii.
For EU national claimants who are assessed as unable to work but with evidence of
potential hardship being available to the DM before the decision to refuse on HRT
grounds is stayed, this should be considered following the steps set out below.

iv.
For EU national claimants where any evidence of hardship is raised after the decision
to stay has been made, this should be considered following the steps set out below.

v.
For EU national claimants where any evidence of being unable to work is raised at
mandatory reconsideration stage, this should be considered following the steps set
out below.

C.
AT Charter threshold: Ability to work

6.  In light of the AT Upper Tribunal decision, where a claimant is able to work, refusal of UC will
not violate their Charter rights as they are themselves able to avoid destitution by working.
Such claims should be processed as normal and disallowed for not passing the HRT. Claimants
will not meet the AT Charter threshold if able to work even if the claimant is not currently
working.

7.  When determining a claimant’s ability to work, consideration should reasonably be given to
barriers to working which could be physical or mental health conditions, homelessness, having
childcare or other caring responsibilities, being a victim of domestic violence, or having other
complex needs which mean the claimant is unable to work at that moment.

8.  If  the  claimant  is  under  the  No  Work  Related  Requirements,  Work  Preparation  or  Work
Focused Interview only conditionality groups, he/she is not expected to look for work at the
present time and should not be considered able to work for the purposes of paragraph 6.

9.  If the claimant is within the Intensive Work Regime, this is a strong indication of ability to work
although it is possible that the claimant is in fact deemed unable to work at that very moment
in time. It should be checked therefore if work coaches have switched off work availability and
work  search  requirements  by  way  of  temporary  easements.  Claimants  may  also  present
evidence which has not been seen by a work coach.
2

10. The following questions and points can also be used when determining a claimant’s ability to
work with a request for evidence in support:

-
Any issues regarding physical or mental ill health, e.g., in relation to the diagnosis, effects
and prognosis of any such condition and its effect on capability to work?
-
What is the number and age of any children the claimant is responsible for and are there
any health issues, disabilities or special educational needs that are relevant, for example
to making obtaining of childcare difficult?
-
What alternatives are available to the claimant in terms of nursery or other pre-school
provision and/or schools? Or family or friends who could support with childcare?
-
In terms of other caring responsibilities, what care is provided, to whom, how much time
does this take, could the care be provided from another source?
-
Claimants may mention not working as having recently become homeless and taking steps
to find accommodation.
-
Claimants may mention being unable to work due to domestic abuse. Evidence may be
from a person acting in an official capacity such as a healthcare professional, police officer,
registered social worker or any public, voluntary or charitable body which has had direct
contact with the claimant in connection with domestic abuse.

11. For claimants able to work, the UC claim should be disallowed as the claimant does not meet
the threshold set out in the AT case following the BAU process. [Use SP1]

12. For  claimants  who  are  assessed  as  unable to  work  but  have  raised  hardship,  a  DM should
follow  the  steps from paragraph 13 below. If no hardship has been raised, the decision to
refuse their UC claim should now be stayed. [Use SP2]

D.
AT Charter threshold: Assessment

13. Where (1) AT applies, (2) the claimant is deemed unable to work and (3) has raised evidence
of hardship, a DM should note and follow the following points and steps:

14. Hardship in these instructions means the inability to “meet their most basic needs” and should
be considered as relevant whether claimants reference the case of AT or not.

15. However, when assessing hardship, the following principles should be noted:
a)  the claimant’s position would have to meet a particularly high level of severity;
b)  their position must amount to extreme material poverty;
c)  such that they cannot meet their most basic needs, which include food, personal hygiene,
clothing and a place to live with adequate heating;
d)  further and additionally, the situation must either (a) undermine the claimant’s physical
or mental health, or (b) put them in a situation of degradation incompatible with human
dignity;
e)  that situation is to be such that it can be equated to inhuman and degrading treatment
(i.e. breach of Art.3 ECHR or Art.4 of the Charter); and
f) to the extent that the situation arises from the person’s “wishes and personal choices” it
can be discounted.
3

16. This assessment can apply to new claims, mandatory reconsiderations and HRT reviews but it
is  only  required  in  respect  of  periods  of  potential  entitlement  from  12  December  2022
onwards. For any potential entitlement from before 12 December 2022, the claimant must be
assessed on the law as it was before the AT decision was made and there is therefore no AT
Charter assessment to consider in such cases.

17. The assessment is to be done by reference to the individualised circumstances of a claimant’s
case to the usual standard of on the balance of probabilities.


Relevant considerations and evidence
18. The  focus  of  the  assessment  is  on  the  claimant’s  ability  to  meet  “their  most  basic  needs”
presently  and  in  the  immediate  future,  pursuant  to  the  threshold  principles  set  out  in
paragraph 13 above. While many claimants will have financial needs, as evidenced by having
made a claim for benefits, this is a high threshold that many will not meet.

19. DMs should consider what information and evidence would be relevant, how to obtain it and
whether this can be done sensitively. In all instances, DMs should consider what information
is already available on DWP systems. DMs should bear in mind that claimants’ oral evidence,
if credible, must be taken into consideration. It is important that evidence is noted on DWP
systems.

a) Is the claimant able to meet their “most basic needs”, which include but may not be limited
to  housing,  basic level  of heating  adequate  for  a  person's  health,  food,  clothing,  and
personal  hygiene.  When  considering  the  claimant's  basic  circumstances,  relevant
questions to gather evidence about and to consider include:

Accommodation and heating:
-
Is  the  claimant  single,  in  a  couple,  supported  by  friends,  family,  the  local  authority  or
charities? Is the claimant looking after a child/ren or anyone else, and are there particular
health or disability issues?
-
Is the claimant homeless or at such risk in the very near future?
-
Where the claimant states that they are not able to pay for accommodation, what steps
have been taken in relation to more affordable accommodation?
-
Is there any evidence that the accommodation is impacting the claimant’s physical and
mental health and that the claimant is unable to find alternative accommodation?
-
Is there evidence of insufficient heating, also looking at the household composition e.g. if
it includes a person with a health condition or responsibility for a child or qualifying young
person. Of relevance could be a doctor's or health care professional's letter verifying that
the lack of heating will cause suffering.

Food:
-
Is  the  claimant  single,  in  a  couple,  supported  by  friends,  family,  the  local  authority  or
charities? Is the claimant looking after a child/ren or anyone else?
-
What means  does  the  claimant  have  to  access  food supplies?  When  was  the  last  food
shop, how long was this shopping supposed to last and reasons for it running out very
soon? Does  the  claimant  have  money available  to purchase  food and has the claimant
sought and/or received assistance through charities, foodbanks and local authorities?
4

-
A claimant is likely to be assessed as being in immediate hardship if they have insufficient
resources to provide meals for the coming seven days if they have responsibility for a child
or qualifying young person, provide care for an adult or live with a person with a health
condition.
Clothing and personal hygiene:
-
Hygiene costs and services include toilet roll, toothpaste, soap, nappies, sanitary products,
washing detergent and laundry services.
-
Where  a  claimant  says  they  have  no  immediate  resource  to  meet  their  own  or  their
household's hygiene needs, seek to establish what products or services are required and
whether these items or services are available free or from alternative sources, for example
immediate family, doctors or health centres.
-
Does the claimant have seasonally appropriate clothing for themselves and their family
and, if not, are they able to purchase or source from second hand shops, charities, friends
or family?
-
Is there any evidence of detrimental impact on physical or mental health?

b) Is the claimant able to access any alternative resources or sources of income – this could
include the claimant’s household being in receipt of for example wages, rental income,
savings,  welfare  payments,  pension  or  welfare  benefit  payments  from  abroad,  bank
interest, real property, maintenance payments or child maintenance payments from an
ex-spouse or partner, financial support from family members or friends, local authority
support etc.

DMs  should  consider  whether  the  claimant  has  explored  any  other  means  of  financial
support to help them meet or partially meet their household's basic and essential needs.
There is no list in legislation of what these resources could be, and they will vary from
area to area. A claimant is reasonably expected to make efforts to reduce non-essential
costs.

Resources and support:
-
Does the claimant or their partner have any savings, benefits, pensions, child maintenance
payments or income that covers or partially covers the household’s most basic needs?
-
Does the claimant have any non-essential spending such as clubs, society membership or
entertainment activities? Bear in mind that some non-essential spending may require the
claimant to serve notice to cancel.
-
Are there any friends or family who are offering or could offer support?
-
Has  the  claimant  been  in  contact  with  local  charities,  support  groups  and  other
organisations such as the Local Authority, and what is the outcome?
-
Has  the  claimant  explored  any other means of  financial  support  to  help  them  meet or
partially meet their household's basic and essential needs?
-
Is the claimant relying on charities? Is this a reliable steady source of support?

20. To further aid the Decision Making Steps, AT Scenarios can be found in Annex B. This section
provides different scenarios on whether a claimant should be accepted for hardship and the
next steps as detailed in this document.

5

E.
Escalation at any point in decision making

21. If, after initial consideration, a DM is unsure of how to proceed in a specific case, the matter
should, along with the case background and evidence gathered, be referred to DMA (Leeds)
for further consideration using this link and marking it as “AT decision” in the subject. The
referral must set out what the decision-making issue is and, as relevant, include:
a.  UCFS Claimant ID;
b.  Claimant NINO;
c.  the Case history including details of why the claimant cannot meet the HRT, is an AT
case, and is deemed not to be able to work;
d.  Reasons for the decision to stay; and
e.  Details and evidence of any hardship raised and why alternative support cannot cover
basic needs.

F.
AT Charter threshold met - Entitlement period and decision to award universal credit

22. If the Charter threshold is met, then the claim can be considered under the usual UC claim
rules as if the claimant has met the HRT. All other conditionality conditions still need to be
met and business as usual conditionality rules should be followed. As above, any award for
entitlement can only be from 12 December 2022 onwards or from the date of the claim if
later. Continued entitlement should be reviewed periodically.

23. If the decision is taken to award UC, claimants should be notified that in the event that the
UT’s decision is overturned on appeal, they may be required to repay UC as an overpayment.

G.
AT Charter threshold not met - Communication to claimant
24. If the Charter threshold is not met, then the claim is to be refused and this outcome notified
to the claimant.

H.
Change of Circumstances review and MR

25. The same considerations as above apply.

26. To further aid the Decision Making Steps, AT Standard Paragraphs can be found in Annex A.
This section provides all the standard paragraphs that should be issued to claimants for New
Claims, HRT change of circumstances reviews and at Mandatory Reconsideration.







Annex A – Standard Paragraphs
Decision  makers  should  use  the  below  standard  paragraphs,  as  relevant,  to  inform  the
claimant about the outcome of their HRT decisions.

6

New UC Claim

Managing affected cases

Firstly, a DM should assess whether a claimant is able to work. If they are, the claim should

be disallowed as the claimant does not meet the threshold set out in AT.

SP1.
Standard paragraph if claimant is able to work
You claimed Universal Credit on [xx/xx/xx].
We have decided that you cannot get Universal Credit.
You cannot get Universal Credit because:
•  you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain that allows you to access
Universal Credit; and

•  you are able to work, which means you do not meet the hardship criteria set out in a
recent legal case called ‘AT’.
The AT legal case
The legal case is ‘Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v AT (AIRE Centre and
Independent Monitoring Authority for Citizens’ Rights Agreements (IMA) intervening) [2022]
UKUT 330 (Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a qualifying
right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria. You do not meet the criteria.
The criteria only apply to people who are not able to work. We have decided that you are able
to work at this time which means you cannot get Universal Credit.
The decision must include the MR standard paragraph.












If the claimant is unable to work but does not raise hardship at the initial decision-making

stage, the decision to disallow UC should be stayed using the below standard paragraphs.

SP2.
Standard paragraph for staying a decision – single claimant
You claimed Universal Credit on [xx/xx/xx].
7

We have decided that you cannot get Universal Credit.
However, we have paused making the decision on your Universal Credit claim.
We have paused the decision because:
•  you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain that allows you to access
Universal Credit; and

•  based on the information provided with your claim you do not meet the hardship
criteria set out in a recent legal case called ‘AT’.
The AT legal case
The legal case is ‘Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v AT (AIRE Centre and
Independent Monitoring Authority for Citizens’ Rights Agreements (IMA) intervening) [2022]
UKUT 330 (Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a
qualifying right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria. You do not meet the
criteria.
The decision in this case is being appealed by the Secretary of State.
Because of this appeal, we are pausing making decisions on claims affected, under section 25
of the Social Security Act 1998.
Our decision in relation to your claim will be reviewed when the legal case has been finally
decided in the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court.
You do not have the right to appeal against the Secretary of State’s decision to pause making
the decision on your claim.
If this situation causes hardship
If this situation will cause you hardship, or if your circumstances change or you believe you
have another type of right to reside, please let us know.










8

   Standard paragraph for staying a decision – joint claim –
SP3.
partner not entitled (not on HRT grounds)
You and your partner claimed Universal Credit on [xx/xx/xx].
We have decided that you and your partner cannot get Universal Credit at this time.
However, we have paused making the decision on your Universal Credit claim.
We have paused the decision because:
•  you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain that allows you to access
Universal Credit; and
•  based on the information provided with your claim you do not meet the hardship
criteria set out in a recent legal case called ‘AT’.
The AT legal case
The legal case is ‘Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v AT (AIRE Centre and
Independent Monitoring Authority for Citizens’ Rights Agreements (IMA) intervening) [2022]
UKUT 330 (Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a
qualifying right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria. You do not meet the
criteria.
The decision in this case is being appealed by the Secretary of State.
Because of this appeal, we are pausing making decisions on claims affected, under section 25
of the Social Security Act 1998.
Our decision in relation to your claim will be reviewed when the legal case has been finally
decided in the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court.
To note: The reason your partner cannot get Universal Credit will be explained to them in a
separate notification
You do not have the right to appeal against the Secretary of State’s decision on your claim.
If this situation causes hardship
If this situation will cause you hardship, or if your circumstances change or you believe you
have another type of right to reside, please let us know.











9

   Standard paragraph for staying a decision – joint claim –
SP4.
partner not entitled (both on HRT   grounds)

You and your partner claimed Universal Credit on [xx/xx/xx].
We have decided that you and your partner cannot get Universal Credit at this time.
However, we have paused making the decision on your joint Universal Credit claim.
We have paused the decision because:
•  you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain that allows you to access
Universal Credit; and
•  based on the information provided with your claim you do not meet the hardship
criteria set out in a recent legal case called ‘AT’.
The AT legal case
The legal case is ‘Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v AT (AIRE Centre and
Independent Monitoring Authority for Citizens’ Rights Agreements (IMA) intervening) [2022]
UKUT 330 (Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a
qualifying right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria. You do not meet the
criteria.
The decision in this case is being appealed by the Secretary of State.
Because of this appeal, we are pausing making decisions on claims affected, under section 25
of the Social Security Act 1998.
Our decision in relation to your claim will be reviewed when the legal case has been finally
decided in the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court.
To note: Your partner will receive a separate notification with their decision.
You do not have the right to appeal against the Secretary of State’s decision on your claim.
If this situation causes hardship
If this situation will cause you hardship, or if your circumstances change or you believe you
have another type of right to reside, please let us know.







10

   Standard paragraph for staying a decision – joint claim –

SP5.
partner entitled only
You and your partner claimed Universal Credit on [xx/xx/xx].
We have decided to treat you as an ineligible partner. This means that whilst your partner can
get Universal Credit, you cannot at this time.
However, we have paused making the decision on your Universal Credit claim.
We have paused the decision because:
•  you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain that allows you to access
to Universal Credit; and
•  based on the information provided with your claim you do not meet the hardship
criteria set out in a recent legal case called ‘AT’. This means that you are treated as
an ineligible partner, as this case may be relevant to you.
The AT legal case
The legal case is ‘Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v AT (AIRE Centre and Independent
Monitoring  Authority  for  Citizens’  Rights  Agreements  (IMA)  intervening)  [2022]  UKUT  330
(Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a qualifying
right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria. You do not meet the criteria.
The decision in this case is being appealed by the Secretary of State.
Because of this appeal, we are pausing making decisions on claims affected, under section 25
of the Social Security Act 1998.
Our decision in relation to your claim will be reviewed when the legal case has been finally
decided in the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court.
To note: Your partner will receive a separate notification with their decision.
You do not have the right to appeal against this Secretary of State’s decision on your claim.
If this situation causes hardship
If this situation will cause you hardship, or if your circumstances change or you believe you
have another type of right to reside, please let us know.







11

   Standard paragraph for staying a decision – joint claim –

12

Hardship raised – AT Charter threshold not met

Having considered the AT Charter threshold, if this is not met, a DM must disallow the claim

on HRT grounds.

SP6.
Standard paragraph when AT Charter threshold is not met - When claimants mention
hardship at the making of their UC claim
You claimed Universal Credit on [xx/xx/xx].
We have decided that you cannot get Universal Credit.
Your claim of hardship
You told us that you – and any dependants, if you have them – will suffer hardship if you do
not receive Universal Credit.
When reviewing your claim, we have considered whether you will suffer hardship if Universal
Credit is not paid.
You cannot get Universal Credit because:
•  you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain that allows you to
access Universal Credit; and
•  based on the information provided with your claim you do not meet the hardship
criteria set out in a recent legal case called ‘AT’.
The AT legal case
The  legal  case  is  ‘Secretary  of  State  for  Work  and  Pensions  v  AT  (AIRE  Centre  and  IMA
intervening) [2022] UKUT 330 (Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a qualifying
right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria.
We have decided that you do not meet the criteria and so cannot get Universal Credit.

Reason for our decision
[Explain our reasoning to prevent unnecessary confusion and contact as the claimant will
most likely want to know why.]
The decision must include the MR standard paragraph.






13

SP7.
Standard paragraph when AT Charter threshold is not met – When claimants represent
hardship following the staying of their HRT decision
You claimed Universal Credit on [xx/xx/xx].
We have decided that you cannot get Universal Credit
On [x date] we told you that we were pausing the decision on your claim because of the ‘AT’
legal case.
Your claim of hardship
On [y date] you told us that you – and any dependants, if you have them – will suffer hardship
if you do not receive Universal Credit.
We have looked again at your claim.
You cannot get Universal Credit because:
•  you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain that allows you to access
Universal Credit; and
•  based on the information provided with your claim you do not meet the hardship
criteria set out in the case of ‘AT’ – as explained in our previous letter to you.
Reason for our decision
[Explain our reasoning to prevent unnecessary confusion and contact as the claimant will
most likely want to know why.]”
The decision must include the MR standard paragraph.














14

Hardship raised – AT Charter threshold met
Having considered the AT Charter threshold, if this is met, a DM must grant the claim on HRT
grounds under normal BAU rules.

SP8.   Standard paragraph for meeting the AT Charter threshold – When claimants mention
hardship at the making of their UC claim:
You claimed Universal Credit on [xx/xx/xx].
We have decided that you can get Universal Credit.
Your claim of hardship
When you made your claim, you told us that you – and any dependants, if you have them –
will suffer hardship if you do not receive Universal Credit.
Why you can get Universal Credit
You can get Universal Credit because, at the current time, you satisfy the hardship criteria set
out in the ‘AT’ legal case.
This  applies  even  though you  do  not  have  a  qualifying  right  to  reside  in  Great  Britain  that
allows you to access to Universal Credit.
The AT legal case
The  legal  case  is  ‘Secretary  of  State  for  Work  and  Pensions  v  AT  (AIRE  Centre  and  IMA
intervening) [2022] UKUT 330 (Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a qualifying
right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria.
Your  Universal  Credit  claim  will  be  granted  on  this  ground  subject  to  you  meeting  all  the
Universal Credit eligibility criteria. This will be kept under review.
However, you need to be aware that this decision is being appealed by the Secretary of State.
If the appeal is successful, any Universal Credit you have been paid may be recovered from
you. If that happens, we will let you know.
[This decision will include standard dispute paras.]












15

SP9.
Standard paragraph for meeting the AT Charter threshold – When claimants represent
hardship following the staying of their HRT decision
You claimed Universal Credit on [xx/xx/xx].
We have decided that you can get Universal Credit.
On [x date] we told you that we were pausing the decision on your claim because of the ‘AT’
legal case.
Your claim of hardship
On [y date] you told us that you – and any dependants, if you have them – will suffer hardship
if you do not receive Universal Credit.
We have looked again at your claim.
Why you can get Universal Credit
You can get Universal Credit because, at the current time, you satisfy the hardship criteria
set out in the ‘AT’ legal case – as explained in our previous letter to you. This will be kept
under review.
This applies even though you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain which
gives you access to Universal Credit.
However, you need to be aware that this decision is being appealed by the Secretary of State.
If the appeal is successful, any Universal Credit you have been paid may be recovered from
you. If that happens, we will let you know.
[This decision will include standard dispute paras.]


















16

HRT change of circumstances reviews

Managing affected cases

Claimants are required to report any changes to their circumstances (i.e. if they stopped
working) and there is chance that the claimant will no longer meet the HRT requirements for
the purposes of accessing UC. However, it is possible that some claimants may fall under AT.
In these cases, DMs should assess whether a claimant is able to work. If they can, the
existing award should be terminated as the claimant does not meet the threshold set out in
AT. This will be a supersession for a change of circumstances. Please note, if there is a
change to a claimant’s circumstances and they continue to meet the UC requirements, the
above does not apply.

SP10. Standard paragraph if claimant is able to work
You reported a change in your circumstances on your Universal Credit claim on [xx/xx/xx].
We have decided that you can no longer get Universal Credit.
You can no longer get Universal Credit because:
•  you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain that allows you to access
Universal Credit; and
•  you are able to work, which means you do not meet the hardship criteria set out in a
recent legal case called ‘AT’.
The AT legal case
The legal case is ‘Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v AT (AIRE Centre and
Independent Monitoring Authority for Citizens’ Rights Agreements (IMA) intervening) [2022]
UKUT 330 (Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a qualifying
right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria. You do not meet the criteria.
The criteria only apply to people who are not able to work. We have decided that you are able
to work at this time which means you cannot get Universal Credit.
The decision must include the MR standard paragraph.












17

If the claimant is unable to work but does not raise hardship at the initial decision-making

stage, the decision to disallow UC should be stayed using the below standard paragraphs.

SP11. Standard paragraph for staying a decision – single claimant
You reported a change in your circumstances on your Universal Credit claim on [xx/xx/xx].
We have decided that you can no longer get Universal Credit
However, we have paused making the decision on your Universal Credit claim.
We have paused the decision because:
•  you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain that allows you to
access Universal Credit; and
•  based on the information provided with your claim you do not meet the hardship
criteria set out in a recent legal case called ‘AT’.
The AT legal case
The legal case is ‘Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v AT (AIRE Centre and
Independent Monitoring Authority for Citizens’ Rights Agreements (IMA) intervening) [2022]
UKUT 330 (Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a qualifying
right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria. You do not meet the criteria.
The decision in this case is being appealed by the Secretary of State.
Because of this appeal, we are pausing making decisions on claims affected, under section 25
of the Social Security Act 1998.
Our decision in relation to your claim will be reviewed when the legal case has been finally
decided in the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court.
You do not have the right to appeal against the Secretary of State’s decision to pause making
the decision on your claim.
If this situation causes hardship
If this situation will cause you hardship, or if your circumstances change or you believe you
have another type of right to reside, please let us know.









18

SP12. Standard paragraph for staying a decision - joint claim - partner not entitled (not on HRT
grounds)
You reported a change in your circumstances on your Universal Credit claim on [xx/xx/xx].
We have decided that you and your partner can no longer get Universal Credit at this time.
However, we have paused making the decision on your Universal Credit claim.
We have paused the decision because:
•  you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain that allows you to
access Universal Credit; and
•  based on the information provided with your claim you do not meet the hardship
criteria set out in a recent legal case called ‘AT’.
The AT legal case
The legal case is ‘Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v AT (AIRE Centre and Independent
Monitoring  Authority  for  Citizens’  Rights  Agreements  (IMA)  intervening)  [2022]  UKUT  330
(Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a qualifying
right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria. You do not meet the criteria.
The decision in this case is being appealed by the Secretary of State.
Because of this appeal, we are pausing making decisions on claims affected, under section 25
of the Social Security Act 1998.
Our decision in relation to your claim will be reviewed when the legal case has been finally
decided in the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court.
To note: The reason your partner cannot get Universal Credit will be explained to them in a
separate notification
You do not have the right to appeal against this Secretary of State’s decision on your claim.
If this situation causes hardship
If this situation will cause you hardship, or if your circumstances change or you believe you
have another type of right to reside, please let us know.










19

SP13. Standard paragraph for staying a decision – joint claim – partner not entitled (both on HRT
grounds)
You and your partner reported a change in your circumstances on your Universal Credit claim
on [xx/xx/xx].
We have decided that you and your partner can no longer get Universal Credit. However,
we have paused making the decision on your joint Universal Credit claim
We have paused making the decision because:
•  you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain that allows you to
access to Universal Credit; and
•  based on the information provided with your claim you do not meet the hardship
criteria set out in a recent legal case called ‘AT’.
The AT legal case
The legal case is ‘Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v AT (AIRE Centre and Independent
Monitoring  Authority  for  Citizens’  Rights  Agreements  (IMA)  intervening)  [2022]  UKUT  330
(Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a qualifying
right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria. You do not meet the criteria.
The decision in this case is being appealed by the Secretary of State.
Because of this appeal, we are pausing making decisions on claims affected, under section 25
of the Social Security Act 1998.
Our decision in relation to your claim will be reviewed when the legal case has been finally
decided in the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court.
To note. Your partner will receive a separate notification with their decision.
You do not have the right to appeal against this Secretary of State’s decision on your claim.
If this situation causes hardship
If this situation will cause you hardship, or if your circumstances change or you believe you
have another type of right to reside, please let us know.











20

SP14. Standard paragraph for staying a decision – joint claim – partner entitled only
You and your partner reported a change in your circumstances on your Universal Credit claim
on [xx/xx/xx].
We have decided to treat you as an ineligible partner. This means that whilst your partner can
get Universal Credit, you can no longer get it at this time.
However, we have paused making the decision on your Universal Credit claim.
We have paused making the decision because:
•  you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain that allows you to
access to Universal Credit; and
•  based on the information provided with your claim you do not meet the
hardship criteria set out in a recent legal case called ‘AT’. This means that you
are treated as an ineligible partner as this case may be relevant to you.
The AT legal case
The legal case is ‘Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v AT (AIRE Centre and Independent
Monitoring  Authority  for  Citizens’  Rights  Agreements  (IMA)  intervening)  [2022]  UKUT  330
(Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a qualifying
right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria. You do not meet the criteria.
The decision in this case is being appealed by the Secretary of State.
Because of this appeal, we are pausing making decisions on claims affected, under section 25
of the Social Security Act 1998.
Our decision in relation to your claim will be reviewed when the legal case has been finally
decided in the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court.
To note. Your partner will receive a separate notification with their decision.
You do not have the right to appeal against this Secretary of State’s decision on your claim.
If this situation causes hardship
If this situation will cause you hardship, or if your circumstances change or you believe you
have another type of right to reside, please let us know.









21

Hardship raised – AT Charter threshold not met

Having considered the AT Charter threshold, if this is not met, a DM must disallow the claim

on HRT grounds.

SP15. Standard paragraph when AT Charter threshold is not met – When claimants mention hardship
when reporting a change in circumstances

You reported a change in your circumstances on your Universal Credit claim on [xx/xx/xx].
On x date we told you that you could no longer get Universal Credit but that we would be
pausing making that decision because of the case of AT.
We also told you that if our decision caused you hardship you should tell us.
Your claim of hardship
You told us that you – and any dependants, if you have them – will suffer hardship if you do
not receive Universal Credit.
When reviewing your claim, we have considered whether you will suffer hardship if Universal
Credit is not paid.
You cannot get Universal Credit because:
•  you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain that allows you to access
Universal Credit; and
•  based on the information provided with your claim you do not meet the hardship
criteria set out in a recent legal case called ‘AT’ – as explained in our previous letter
to you.
Reason for our decision
[Explain our reasoning to prevent unnecessary confusion and contact as the claimant will
most likely want to know why.]
The decision must include the MR standard paragraph.





Hardship raised – AT Charter threshold met
Having considered the AT Charter threshold, if this is met, a DM must grant the claim on HRT
grounds under normal BAU rules.

SP16. Standard paragraph for meeting the AT Charter threshold – When claimants mention hardship
when reporting a change in circumstances
You reported a change in your circumstances on your Universal Credit claim on [xx/xx/xx].
22

On x date we told that you could no longer get Universal Credit but that we would be pausing
making that decision because of the case of AT.
We also told you that if our decision caused you hardship you should tell us.
Your claim of hardship
When  you  reported  a  change  in  your  circumstances,  you  told  us  that  you  –  and  any
dependants, if you have them – will suffer hardship if you do not receive Universal Credit.
Why you can get Universal Credit
You can get Universal Credit because, at the current time, you satisfy the hardship criteria set
out in the ‘AT’ legal case – as explained in our previous letter to you.
This  applies  even  though you  do  not  have  a  qualifying  right  to  reside  in  Great  Britain  that
allows you to access to Universal Credit.
The AT legal case
The  legal  case  is  ‘Secretary  of  State  for  Work  and  Pensions  v  AT  (AIRE  Centre  and  IMA
intervening) [2022] UKUT 330 (Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a qualifying
right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria.
Your  Universal  Credit  claim  will  be  granted  on  this  ground  subject  to  you  meeting  all  the
Universal Credit eligibility criteria. This will be kept under review.
However, you need to be aware that this decision is being appealed by the Secretary of State.
If the appeal is successful, any Universal Credit you have been paid may be recovered from
you. If that happens, we will let you know.
[This decision will include standard dispute paras.]










Mandatory Reconsiderations
Standard paragraph to use for Mandatory Reconsiderations affecting periods of entitlement
on or after 12/12/22.

Firstly, a DM should assess whether a claimant is able to work. If they are, the claim should
be disallowed as the claimant does not meet the threshold set out in AT.

SP17. Standard paragraph if claimant is able to work
23

You claimed Universal Credit on [xx/xx/xx].
Your claim was not allowed because you did not have a right to reside in Great Britain that
allows you to claim benefits.
You applied for a Mandatory Reconsideration on [xx date].
We have decided that you cannot get Universal Credit.
You cannot get Universal Credit because:
•  you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain that allows you to
access Universal Credit; and
•  you are able to work, which means you do not meet the hardship criteria set out
in a recent legal case called ‘AT’.
The AT legal case
The legal case is ‘Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v AT (AIRE Centre and
Independent Monitoring Authority for Citizens’ Rights Agreements (IMA) intervening) [2022]
UKUT 330 (Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a qualifying
right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria. You do not meet the criteria.
The criteria only apply to people who are not able to work. We have decided that you are able
to work at this time which means you cannot get Universal Credit.
The decision must include the MR standard paragraph.














If the claimant is unable to work but does not raise hardship at the initial decision-making

stage, the decision to disallow UC should be stayed using the below standard paragraphs.

SP18. Standard paragraph for staying a decision – single claimant
You claimed Universal Credit on [xx/xx/xx].
Your claim was not allowed because you did not have a right to reside in Great Britain that
allows you to claim benefits.
24

You applied for a Mandatory Reconsideration on [xx date].
However, we have paused making the decision on your MR application.
We have paused the decision because:
•  you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain that allows you to
access Universal Credit; and
•  based on the information provided with your claim you do not meet the hardship
criteria set out in a recent legal case called ‘AT’.
The AT legal case
The legal case is ‘Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v AT (AIRE Centre and
Independent Monitoring Authority for Citizens’ Rights Agreements (IMA) intervening) [2022]
UKUT 330 (Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a qualifying
right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria. You do not meet the criteria.
The decision in this case is being appealed by the Secretary of State.
Because of this appeal, we are pausing making decisions on claims affected, under section 25
of the Social Security Act 1998.
Our decision in relation to your claim will be reviewed when the legal case has been finally
decided in the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court.
You do not have the right to appeal against the Secretary of State’s decision to pause making
the decision on your claim.
If this situation causes hardship
If this situation will cause you hardship, or if your circumstances change or you believe you
have another type of right to reside, please let us know.






25

– joint claim
SP19.  Standard paragraph for staying a decision
- partner not entitled (not HRT grounds)
You and your partner claimed Universal Credit on [xx/xx/xx].
Your claim was not allowed because you did not have a right to reside in Great Britain that
allows you to claim benefits.
You applied for a Mandatory Reconsideration on [xx date].
We  have  decided  to  pause  making  the  decision  on  your  Mandatory  Reconsideration
application.
We have paused the decision because:
•  you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain that allows you to
access Universal Credit; and
•  based on the information provided with your claim you do not meet the hardship
criteria set out in a recent legal case called ‘AT’.
The AT legal case
The legal case is ‘Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v AT (AIRE Centre and
Independent Monitoring Authority for Citizens’ Rights Agreements (IMA) intervening) [2022]
UKUT 330 (Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a qualifying
right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria. You do not meet the criteria.
The decision in this case is being appealed by the Secretary of State.
Because of this appeal, we are pausing making decisions on claims affected, under section 25
of the Social Security Act 1998.
Our decision in relation to your claim will be reviewed when the legal case has been finally
decided in the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court.
To note: The reason your partner cannot get Universal Credit will be explained to them in a
separate notification
You do not have the right to appeal against the Secretary of State’s decision to pause making
the decision on your claim.
If this situation causes hardship
If this situation will cause you hardship, or if your circumstances change or you believe you
have another type of right to reside, please let us know.






SP20. Standard paragraph for staying a decision – partner not entitled (both on HRT grounds)
26

– joint claim
You and your partner claimed Universal Credit on [xx/xx/xx].
Your claim was not allowed because you did not have a right to reside in Great Britain that
allows you to claim benefits.
You and your partner applied for a Mandatory Reconsideration on [xx date].
We  have  decided  to  pause  making  the  decision  on  your  joint  Mandatory  Reconsideration
application.
We have paused the decision because:
•  you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain that allows you to
access Universal Credit; and
•  based on the information provided with your claim you do not meet the hardship
criteria set out in a recent legal case called ‘AT’.
The AT legal case
The legal case is ‘Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v AT (AIRE Centre and
Independent Monitoring Authority for Citizens’ Rights Agreements (IMA) intervening) [2022]
UKUT 330 (Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a qualifying
right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria. You do not meet the criteria.
The decision in this case is being appealed by the Secretary of State.
Because of this appeal, we are pausing making decisions on claims affected, under section 25
of the Social Security Act 1998.
Our decision in relation to your claim will be reviewed when the legal case has been finally
decided in the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court.
To note. Your partner will receive a separate notification with their decision.
You do not have the right to appeal against the Secretary of State’s decision to pause making
the decision on your claim.
If this situation causes hardship
If this situation will cause you hardship, or if your circumstances change or you believe you
have another type of right to reside, please let us know.








SP21.  Standard paragraph for staying a decision
– partner entitled only

27

– joint claim
You and your partner claimed Universal Credit on [xx/xx/xx].
Your claim was not allowed because you did not have a right to reside in Great Britain that
allows you to claim benefits.
You applied for a Mandatory Reconsideration on [xx date].
We have decided to treat you as an ineligible partner. This means that whilst your partner can
get Universal Credit, you cannot at this time.
However, we have paused making the decision on your application.
We have paused the decision because:
•  you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain that allows you to
access to Universal Credit; and
•  based on the information provided with your claim you do not meet the
hardship criteria set out in a recent legal case called ‘AT’. This means that you
are treated as an ineligible partner as this case may be relevant to you.
The AT legal case
The legal case is ‘Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v AT (AIRE Centre and Independent
Monitoring  Authority  for  Citizens’  Rights  Agreements  (IMA)  intervening)  [2022]  UKUT  330
(Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a qualifying
right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria. You do not meet the criteria.
Because of this appeal, we are pausing making decisions on claims affected, under section 25
of the Social Security Act 1998.
Our decision in relation to your claim will be reviewed when the legal case has been finally
decided in the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court.
To note. Your partner will receive a separate notification with their decision.
You do not have the right to appeal against this Secretary of State’s decision on your claim.
If this situation causes hardship
If this situation will cause you hardship, or if your circumstances change or you believe you

another type of right to reside, please let us know.








28

Hardship raised – AT Charter threshold not met

Having considered the AT Charter threshold, if this is not met, a DM must disallow the claim

on HRT grounds.

SP22. Standard paragraph when AT Charter threshold is not met – When claimants mention hardship
at the making of their MR claim
You claimed Universal Credit on [xx/xx/xx].
Your claim was not allowed because you did not have a right to reside in Great Britain that
allows you to claim benefits.
You applied for a Mandatory Reconsideration on [xx date].
We told you that we were pausing making a decision on your MR because of the AT case, but
that you could apply to get Universal Credit on hardship grounds.
We have decided that you cannot get Universal Credit.
Your claim of hardship
You told us that you – and any dependants, if you have them – will suffer hardship if you do
not receive Universal Credit.
When reviewing your claim, we have considered whether you will suffer hardship if Universal
Credit is not paid.
You cannot get Universal Credit because:
•  you do not have a qualifying right to reside in Great Britain that allows you to access
Universal Credit; and
•  based on the information provided with your claim you do not meet the hardship
criteria set out in a recent legal case called ‘AT’ – as explained in our previous letter
to you.
The AT legal case
The  legal  case  is  ‘Secretary  of  State  for  Work  and  Pensions  v  AT  (AIRE  Centre  and  IMA
intervening) [2022] UKUT 330 (Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a qualifying
right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria.
We have decided that you do not meet the criteria and so cannot get Universal Credit.
Reason for our decision
[Explain our reasoning to prevent unnecessary confusion and contact as the claimant will
most likely want to know why.]
The decision must include the MR standard paragraph.




29

Hardship raised – AT Charter threshold met
Having considered the AT Charter threshold, if this is met, a DM must grant the claim on HRT
grounds under normal BAU rules.

SP23. Standard paragraph for meeting the AT Charter threshold – When claimants mention hardship
at the making of their MR claim
You claimed Universal Credit on [xx/xx/xx].
Your claim was not allowed because you did not have a right to reside in Great Britain that
allows you to claim benefits.
You applied for a Mandatory Reconsideration on [xx date].
We have decided that you can get Universal Credit.
Your claim of hardship
When you made your claim, you told us that you – and any dependants, if you have them –
will suffer hardship if you do not receive Universal Credit.
Why you can get Universal Credit
You can get Universal Credit because, at the current time, you satisfy the hardship criteria set
out in the ‘AT’ legal case – as explained in our previous letter to you.
This  applies  even  though you  do  not  have  a  qualifying  right  to  reside  in  Great  Britain  that
allows you to access to Universal Credit.
The AT legal case
The  legal  case  is  ‘Secretary  of  State  for  Work  and  Pensions  v  AT  (AIRE  Centre  and  IMA
intervening) [2022] UKUT 330 (Administrative Appeals Chamber AAC)’.
The case states that some people may get Universal Credit even if they do not have a qualifying
right to reside in Great Britain but meet the hardship criteria.
Your  Universal  Credit  claim  will  be  granted  on  this  ground  subject  to  you  meeting  all  the
Universal Credit eligibility criteria. This will be kept under review.
However, you need to be aware that this decision is being appealed by the Secretary of State.
If the appeal is successful, any Universal Credit you have been paid may be recovered from
you. If that happens, we will let you know.
[This decision will include standard dispute paras.]


Annex B – AT Scenarios

30

Scenario 1 – AT Charter Hardship accepted
Louisa  is  a Romanian  national  and  has  been  residing  in  the  UK  since  08.11.2018.  She  was  granted
presettled status on 02.02.2021. On 22.12.2022 Louisa applied for UC with the support of her local
women’s  domestic  violence  refuge.  With  the  assistance  of  her  support  worker  she  entered  the
following information to her UC journal: Louisa was in genuine and effective work up until the birth of
her  son  in  September  2021  and  was  on maternity  leave  until  September 2022.  After  this  she  was
jobseeking. Whilst looking for work she was financially supported by her partner and struggled to find
work  whilst  balancing  childcare.  As  the  time  passed  and  the  bills  started  to  increase  her  partner
started to become violent towards her. On the 20.11.2022 the police were called and Louisa and her
son had to move to a safer accommodation. The accommodation, provided by a shelter, is not suitable
to be lived in for a prolonged period of time, and LA made it clear that presently they are unable to
provide a more suitable accommodation for a mother with a young child. Louisa has health conditions
and  her  son  (after  having  been  assessed  by  the  local  authority)  is  showing  signs  of  delayed
development.  Louisa  is  isolated  and  the  sole  carer  of  her  young  son.  She  has  only  received  the
occasional food voucher and had no further support from family or friends, and despite receiving some
support from the LA, it is not sufficient to cover the food cost for Louisa and her baby in the immediate
term.  Louisa  is  happy  to  provide  evidence  if  supported.  Louisa  is  placed  in  the  ‘Work  Focussed
Interview’ group due to the age of her son.
On initial consideration of the HRT it is apparent that Louisa has no qualifying right to reside for UC
purposes. However, given the details provided regarding her current circumstances and inability to
meet  her  and  her  child’s  most  basic  needs,  staying  the  decision  would  be  incorrect.  The  Decision
Maker decides to follow the guidance in the AT Charter instructions and put the claim into payment
on AT Charter grounds.

Scenario 2 – Living with family, able to work
Antonio is an Italian national who came to the UK in the 1990s, as a child aged 9. Antonio believes he
should be considered as having Settled Status under EUSS  – previously he was granted Pre-Settled
Status  in  2019  and  has  appealed  the  Home  Office  decision.  He  applied  to  UC  on  the  13.12.2022.
Antonio has disabilities and lives with his parents in a local authority property and is named on the
tenancy agreement. Both of his parents are retired now and receive State Pension Credit. His mother
also receives Carer’s Allowance for Antonio. Antonio is actively jobseeking but is struggling to secure
a  job  due  to  his  disabilities.  During  the  HRT  interview  the  DM  determines  Antonio  to  have  been
covered by the Withdrawal Agreement at the relevant time but decides that he has no qualifying right
to reside for the purposes of his claim to UC. The DM decides to stay making the decision. Once this is
communicated to Antonio, he contacts the Service Centre and explains that he is unable to survive
without UC.
The DM follows the guidance in AT Charter instructions to assess if Antonio can meet his basic needs.
Following  the  conversation  with  him,  alongside  information  from  departmental  systems,  the  DM
decides that although Antonio might be struggling to find work, he is able to work and signposting to
support him would be sensible. Furthermore, the DM believes there is no concerns of Antonio’s basic
needs not being met due to other benefits received by the household. The DM makes a decision to
disallow Antonio’s claim because he does not have a qualifying right to reside and does not meet the
AT threshold.

31

Scenario 3 – Savings, able to work
Viktor is a Dutch national. He is separated from his Canadian national spouse and has one child born
in  2013.  Viktor  came  to  the  UK  on  25.07.2019  and  was  granted  pre-settled  status  on  29.10.2019.
During his stay in the UK he did not work because his ex-partner was the breadwinner and he looked
after their daughter. The relationship broke down in October 2022 and his partner left the UK. His
partner ceased paying rent on the property and he approached the Local Authority who placed him
and his daughter in a temporary accommodation and covered the accommodation fees. Viktor applied
for UC on the 01.01.2023. He was considered by the DM to have no qualifying right to reside for UC
and the decision was stayed.
Viktor contacts the Service Centre to explain that he is receiving no other help or assistance and his
savings are running out. The DM considers whether Viktor’s and his daughter’s basic needs can be
met. The DM notices that on the claim disclosure Viktor declared £4,000 in savings. During their call it
is determined that Victor still has £3,600 of these savings and he is looking for work, to fit around his
daughter’s school time. The DM determines that Viktor is able to meet his and his daughter’s basic
needs  and  that there  are  no  blockers to  him obtaining  employment. The DM makes  a  decision to
disallow Viktor’s claim because he does not have a qualifying right to reside and does not meet the AT
threshold.

Scenario 4 – Unable to work, supported by partner
Anna is a Polish national and applied for UC on the 14.01.2023. Whilst the Decision Maker conducted
the HRT the following information was gathered: she arrived in the UK in September 2018. Studied at
University from 2018 until she graduated on 03.07.2021. She was granted pre-settled Status in 2020,
valid until 2025. To this date she has never worked in the UK, she has declared health conditions and
considers herself unfit for work. Anna has no dependents or family to derive a right from in the UK.
Prior  to  her  application  to  UC  she  had  been  sectioned  under  the  Mental  Health  Act.  She  is  still
recovering  from  Psychosis  and  continues  receiving  treatment  from  Mental  Health  team.  Her
application to PIP  is ongoing.  In  the  claim  disclosure  Anna  declared  to  have  no  housing  costs.  The
decision is made to stay her HRT decision.
Anna stated in her journal that she will be in hardship if the decision is stayed. The Decision Maker
contacts Anna and follows the guidance in these instructions to help assess whether her basic needs
can be met. During the call Anna explains that she lives with her new partner who is covering the
housing  costs  and  other  expenses.  He  currently  earns  £19,000  per  year.  The  Decision  Maker
determines that Anna is not at risk of being unable to meet her basic needs and the decision to stay
the case is correct. The DM makes a decision to disallow Anna’s claim because she does not have a
qualifying right to reside and does not meet the AT threshold.

Scenario 5 - Couple claim, ineligible partner
Jacques is a French national and is living with his British partner Rachael. On the 16.12.2022 the couple
applied for UC. During the HRT interview the following information is gathered: Jacques has previously
worked and been self-employed outside of the UK but has no work history in the UK. Since coming to
the UK in Jan 2019 he has been considered a jobseeker. He had two offers of employment rescinded
during the pandemic and provided no further evidence of jobseeking. Jacques has developed anxiety
and depression and was found to be unfit for work by his GP. He provided evidence of that. As he no
longer was able to work or look for work he started caring for his partner full-time.  As his partner is a
32

British  national,  she  is  entitled  to  UC  immediately. Rachel  has  extensive  health  problems  and  is  in
receipt of PIP too. Jacques is receiving CA as her primary carer. The DM decides that Jacques has no
qualifying right to reside for UC purposes and as he is part of a couple claim the negative decision was
made and communicated. The couple contacted the Service Centre and stated that they are struggling
to pay their bills and believe themselves to be in hardship in accordance with AT.
The  Decision  Maker  contacts  Jacques  again  and  discusses  his  current  situation.  Housing  costs  are
covered  entirely  by  his  partner’s  UC,  they  are  in  receipt  of  other  benefits  in  addition  to  the  UC
payments.  They  are  still  able  to  maintain  their  car,  pay  for  groceries  and  utilities.  There  are  no
concerns made in regard to health and hygiene concerns. The DM decides that the couple are not at
risk of not meeting their basic needs and Jacques’s request is dismissed.

DMA(Leeds)
March 2023

33