Council’s benefit mistake costs vulnerable couple £7,200 a year

A terminally ill grandmother and her husband have been left thousands of pounds worse off and struggling to afford food after following their local council’s advice on benefit payments.

Sandra and Colin Ralphson, from Buxton in Derbyshire, are £600 a month worse off because of the error, which the council admits was not through their own fault.

The trouble began in August when Mrs Ralphson, 60, was incorrectly told by High Peak Council that she would need to move her ‘inherited benefits’ to universal credit within two weeks because her husband Colin was turning 66, the pension age.

The local authority said that from this point it would end its main grant from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and it would “no longer be possible” for the council to support it with housing costs.

This information was incorrect; This was something Mrs Ralphson found out long after she received the advice which would permanently cost her and her husband £7,200 a year.

Ms. Ralphson says the mistake forced them to “give up on everything,” cutting out everything except what was necessary to cope with the loss.

He has lupus, stage 3 kidney failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). She said she lost a lot of weight because she prioritized buying food for her husband, who recently had a heart attack.

“I don’t want to leave the house,” he says, “I don’t want to get dressed.”

“I guess: ‘That’s not me’. I’m Yorkshire. I should be stronger but I’m not. You put on a brave face but what can you do?”

Ms Ralphson had visited the DWP’s ‘Transition to Universal Credit’ page and, after receiving the letter from her council, completed the steps to apply for the new benefit, effectively ending her claim for Employment and Support Allowance (ESA).

Ms. Ralphson was never informed by the department’s system that what she was doing would result in a life-changing loss.

The government has been shifting beneficiaries of all six “inheritance benefits” to universal credit since 2023, implementing a scheme first introduced by the coalition government in 2012. These are child tax credit, working tax credit, housing benefit, income support, income-based jobseeker’s allowance (JSA) and employment and support allowance (ESA).

The latest full impact assessment produced by any government says the policy is designed to “reduce a complex set of benefits that interact in complex ways”, “improve work incentives” and reduce “welfare dependency”.

Under the program’s rules, applicants must wait for transition notification before moving on to new assistance to qualify for transition protection, to ensure they won’t suffer an immediate loss of income during the process.

Ms Ralphson reasonably believed that the letter from the authority meant that she had received her notice. A spokesperson for High Peak District Council admitted: Independent He said the document could provide “greater clarity” and “more detailed information” on the situation.

Were you affected by any of the issues raised in this story? Contact: albert.toth@independence.co.uk

The authority said the letter was sent to it after the DWP twice notified it of changes to benefit entitlements because the couple had become a “mixed-age couple” (one partner had reached retirement age while the other had not). This meant he was no longer eligible for council-administered housing benefit.

He added that the DWP later issued a correction notice confirming this was an error, and that assistance was only reinstated after Ms Ralphson moved to UC. He said he had asked the DWP to consider providing interim protection.

Benefits guidelines indicate the council could suspend Ms Ralphson’s housing benefit while it investigates the discrepancy, rather than sending Ms Ralphson an immediate warning. Since she was the lead plaintiff and not her husband, she would not lose this right.

Meanwhile, the DWP said it no longer kept any records of the notification and advised the Ralphsons to discuss financial compensation with authorities.

Through finger pointing, the couple continues to suffer the consequences.

“When I was sick and lying in bed a lot, my only pleasure was watching television,” Ms. Ralphson said.[but] “I even canceled my television license, so I don’t even watch the things I like to watch anymore.”

“It’s like I’ve given up on everything. I’m not living anymore, I’m just trying to survive.”

Reacting to the case, Caroline Abrahams, charity director at Age UK, said: “The complexity of the benefits system for mixed-age couples continues to cause confusion and administrative errors, often causing serious difficulties for an already vulnerable group of claimants.

“The case discussed here highlights how important it is for everyone who needs it to have access to well-resourced, independent information and advice.

“At Age UK, we are concerned about the income inequality between couples where both partners are of retirement age and couples where one partner is still of working age. In many cases, the younger partner is unable to work due to their own health condition or because they are providing care for their older partner. It is time for the policy to be reviewed.”

A DWP spokesman said: “We understand this is a difficult situation.

“As Mr and Mrs Ralphson chose to move to Universal Credit voluntarily and therefore were not moved via managed switch, switch protection did not apply.

“We have advised Mr and Mrs Ralphson to seek financial compensation with the Local Authority.”

A spokesman for High Peak District Council acknowledged that “the situation was through no fault of Mr and Mrs Ralphson”, adding that it had “asked the DWP to consider providing interim protection”.

“We recognize the stress and uncertainty this situation is causing them and believe that the application of interim protection will be fair and reasonable. We await a response.”