Skip to main content

Ethics of lending and borrowing when your benefit stops



‘I had no clue why my universal credit claim was closed. I have not told DWP that my circumstances have changed.  I had taken out a loan for £5000 whilst I made an appeal against the decision of the DWP; otherwise, I won’t be able to pay my rent.’ 


Mila’s situation raises a number of questions in terms of whether her Universal Credit claim should have been stopped by the Department of Work & Pensions (DWP), or if she should have obtained the loan in the first place to pay her rent or that the appropriate loan company should have even given Mila the loan.  When I spoke to Mila though, her survival instinct drove her to make the application for the loan. If she had taken it out unethically, that no doubt raises more questions.

The Welfare Reform Act 2012 introduced a number of changes in the benefit system. One of these changes was the introduction of Universal Credit. Instead of making a number of claims for means tested benefits - such as support for housing cost and personal allowance; claimants would receive one payment per month, a claim to be make online. Mila was a low income worker that worked consistent hours but her income was not enough to cover her rent as a housing association tenant in a gentrified borough of Hackney. A top up from Universal Credit was how she managed financially. When her account was closed, the first thing in her mind was to find a way to challenge the DWP.

The legal process for Mila to make this challenge is to go through a Mandatory Reconsideration process ,whereby a decision made by its representative is subject to an appeal. If Mila is unsuccessful with this process, she may have to bring a claim to the First Tier Social Security Tribunal. If the decision of the Tribunal is unsatisfactory for Mila, she may have to request for a ‘Statement of Reason’ within a month and then decide whether to make an appeal to the Upper Tribunal. Legal Aid is only available to her if she considers appealing to the Upper Tribunal. 

If a delay occurs in making the Mandatory Reconsideration decision to cause her financial hardship then, according to Child Poverty Action: ‘a ‘quick win’ is possible in cases of poor decision making and delay in public bodies making a decision.’

A threat of Judicial Review may accelerate the decision-making process by the DWP.  It states that pre-action stage is cost free:

‘It just takes [into account] the time of you writing the Pre-action letter. If the decision is not changed at the Pre-action stage… with their claim [they] will have lost nothing. If your client wants to proceed with their claim, legal aid is available for Judicial Review.’

There is also an issue with Mila when it comes to the ethics by which she obtained the loan.  If she obtained the loan by providing false information she may be committing fraud.  The lender would have to take Mila to the County Court and recover the money under civil fraud claim. In my professional experience, a lender rarely takes this step to recover the money. It may just bring a claim for the debt owed. 

In terms of criminal fraud however, Mila would be prosecuted by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) on behalf of the state. If she was prosecuted in the criminal court and found guilty, she could be imprisoned and/or fined for obtaining the money dishonestly.

Although the focus has been on Mila’s actions and intentions to obtain the loan, what responsibilities lie with the lender? According to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) - the firm must undertake a creditworthiness assessment in accordance to its rules and take into account due regard to the outcome of that assessment in respect of affordability risk, in order for the lender to be a responsible lender. 

Naturally, without knowing the full facts of Mila’s case, it’s difficult to know if the lender has fully complied with the FCA’s rules. Also, did the lender request for   evidence of Mila’s actual income? Aside however, the real question for me is: what steps has the creditor taken to show that it would able to recover the loan from Mila?

Mila may default in paying her loan. If she does, what debt option will Mila have to resolve her problems? What can the lender do when Mila defaults in paying her loan?  According to the FCA:  ‘When dealing with customers in default or in arrears, a firm should pay due regard to its obligations under Principle 6 (Customers’ interests) to treat its customers fairly.’ 

If the suspicion is that the lender broke the rules, Mila may argue that it had lent her the loan irresponsibly. If this is the case, she may initially want to make a complaint to the company concerned. If she does not get adequate remedy from the company, she could make a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS). The FOS would then investigate Mila’s complaint and investigate the actions of both Mila and the lender. This is what the HOS has to say if there is a case for irresponsible lending:

‘Our general approach is that the customer should be put back in the position they would have been in if the problem hadn’t happened. We may also ask you to compensate them for any distress or inconvenience they’ve experienced as a result of the problem.’  

Still, it would be too early for me to jump to the conclusion with Mila’s case. It was clear to me that Mila’s struggle for survival made her obtain the loan. When ethics is involved however, it raises a number of other questions - fairness needs to be at the heart of the process either when she is borrowing or when the lender is lending.  It will be interesting to see the outcome of the appeal process, when it comes to the DWP’s position, since for Mila, her problems started once her benefit stopped.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Former Debt Adviser secretly tells UCAN of MaPS contract

Due to fear of being penalised by their employer,  a former debt adviser secretly explains working under Money Advice Pension Service (MaPS) contract. ' MaPS very nearly broke me, and I had to leave debt advice altogether in order to have a quality of life. ' 'The MaPS contract, and in particular its nonsensically onerous DAPA requirements, ended over 20 years of dedicated service with an organisation I had expected to retire working for. The MaPS contract nearly destroyed my physical and emotional health, and that of other long-term, incredibly hardworking debt advisers, who were also left with no option but to change their career direction after 10-20 years and leave to work for other charities or housing associations. The MaPS contract turned both debt advisers and clients into faceless commodities; it was all about the numbers without consideration for the impact its unrealistic and unachievable DAPA requirements have on both debt advice staff and, as a result, clients.

Monju's hot seat on Relaks Radio and UCAN

On Monju's Hot Seat , Relaks Radio,  Ripon, on behalf of UCAN,  talked about the state of Britain today in the context of welfare system and the housing crisis.  Whilst on the show for two hours with Manju Haque, Ripon shared his thoughts on the way the welfare state has been transformed since its creation. In the 19th century, a period of great industrial change in Britain, welfare services were needed to improve the conditions of workers. Germany competed against Britain to develop such a system that was about advancing the safety-net for workers to compete in the global economic market.  Most of the  welfare services, however, were provided by churches, charities and trade unions. After the Second World War the state nationalised many of these services.There were mass social housing development programmes, the creation of the National Health Service and the welfare and social care functions provided by national governments.  Ripon went on to say that since

UCAN's Response to Parliamentary Inquiry on Universal Credit

UNIVERSAL CREDIT ACTION NETWORK   CORONAVIRUS IMPACT: A LESSON FOR US TO LEARN   Universal Credit: the wait for a first payment  - an Inquiry  Response to the Parliamentary Committee’s acceptance of evidence to call on Universal Credit:   The wait for a first payment —— ‘TO WHAT EXTENT HAVE THE MITIGATIONS THE GOVERNMENT HAS INTRODUCED SO FAR (E.G. ADVANCE PAYMENTS) HELPED TO REDUCE THE NEGATIVE IMPACT OF THE FIVE WEEK WAIT FOR UC CLAIMANTS?’ UCAN’S RESPONSE: A SUMMARY Universal Credit Action Network (UCAN) believes that a reduction from six to five weeks waiting period has not made any significant improvements to the financial position of claimants on Universal Credit (UC).   Peobody Trust, one of the largest housing associations in the country, mentioned in its published report in October 2019:  The Impact of Universal Credit , which outlines that 76% of Peobody Trust tenants on UC are in rent arrears. It also stated that five weeks waiting period ha