Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member constituency
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member constituency answering member printed grouped question UIN question first answered answering member label previous answer version answering member constituency answering member printed answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

999665

registered interest
date	01/11/2018
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Universal Credit
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, for what reason the decision was taken to stop the support provided to claimants of existing benefits and tax credits for between three and five weeks when they are migrated to universal credit.
tabling member constituency	East Ham
tabling member printed	Stephen Timms
uin	186921
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 06/11/2018 answer text <p>New claimants to Universal Credit have always been able to apply for a Universal Credit Advance in their first month if they need some financial support until the first regular payment of Universal Credit is made.</p><p> </p><p>We have previously increased the maximum amount available for advances from 50 per cent to 100 per cent of the total award, and increased the repayment period from 6 months to 12 months. Last month’s Budget extended - from October 2021 - the maximum period over which an advance can be recovered, from 12 to 16 months. From October 2019, we will also reduce the maximum rate at which deductions can be made from a Universal Credit award from 40% to 30% of the standard allowance</p><p> </p><p>Additionally in the Budget, it was announced that income related legacy benefits, Income Support, income related Employment and Support Allowance and income based Jobseeker’s Allowance will continue for two weeks after a claim for Universal Credit has been made, from July 2020. This will apply to all managed migration cases and natural migration cases where a claim to Universal Credit ends entitlement to the legacy benefit. This measure means that around 1.1 million people will see a one-off gain of approximately £200, between 2020/21 and 2023/24.</p> answering member constituency Reading West answering member printed Alok Sharma question first answered 06/11/2018 16:43:33 answering member 4014 label Biography information for Sir Alok Sharma
tabling member	163 label Biography information for Sir Stephen Timms

997115

registered interest
date	29/10/2018
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Employment Schemes: Young People
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, when she plans to publish a review of the Youth Obligation; and what the terms of reference will be for that review.
tabling member constituency	East Ham
tabling member printed	Stephen Timms
uin	184837
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/11/2018 answer text <p>The Youth Obligation Support Programme (YOSP) is still in the process of being rolled out to Universal Credit Full Service jobcentres. We will consider an evaluation once the YOSP rollout is complete and enough time has passed to allow sufficient data to be reviewed.</p> answering member constituency Reading West answering member printed Alok Sharma question first answered 01/11/2018 16:39:01 answering member 4014 label Biography information for Sir Alok Sharma
tabling member	163 label Biography information for Sir Stephen Timms

997263

registered interest
date	29/10/2018
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Employment Schemes: Young People
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many people (a) have started the Youth Obligation Support Programme and (b) are taking part in the Youth Obligation Support Programme for the most recent period for which information is available.
tabling member constituency	East Ham
tabling member printed	Stephen Timms
uin	184842
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/11/2018 answer text <p>As the Youth Obligation Support Programme, is being rolled out across the country as part of the broader Universal Credit roll-out, we are using a test and learn process to deliver our services. We are currently reviewing how we best collect and assimilate data on the Youth Obligation Support Programme, to assure ourselves of its delivery.</p> answering member constituency Reading West answering member printed Alok Sharma grouped question UIN 184843 question first answered 01/11/2018 16:35:50 answering member 4014 label Biography information for Sir Alok Sharma
tabling member	163 label Biography information for Sir Stephen Timms

997265

registered interest
date	29/10/2018
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Employment Schemes: Young People
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, when she plans to update the number of Youth Obligation Support Programme (a) starters and (b) participants.
tabling member constituency	East Ham
tabling member printed	Stephen Timms
uin	184843
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/11/2018 answer text <p>As the Youth Obligation Support Programme, is being rolled out across the country as part of the broader Universal Credit roll-out, we are using a test and learn process to deliver our services. We are currently reviewing how we best collect and assimilate data on the Youth Obligation Support Programme, to assure ourselves of its delivery.</p> answering member constituency Reading West answering member printed Alok Sharma grouped question UIN 184842 question first answered 01/11/2018 16:35:50 answering member 4014 label Biography information for Sir Alok Sharma
tabling member	163 label Biography information for Sir Stephen Timms

988891

registered interest
date	16/10/2018
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Personal Independence Payment: Multiple Sclerosis
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many people with multiple sclerosis who were previously in receipt of disability living allowance and have undergone a reassessment for personal independence payment applied for mandatory reconsideration of the decision in each year since 2013.
tabling member constituency	East Ham
tabling member printed	Stephen Timms
uin	180081
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 22/10/2018 answer text <p>Table 1 below shows the number of Personal Independence Payment (PIP) reassessment decisions, mandatory reconsideration (MR) registrations, appeals cleared and decisions overturned at appeal for people with a primary disabling condition of multiple sclerosis.</p><p> </p><p><em>Table 1: Number of PIP reassessment decisions, mandatory reconsideration (MR) registrations, appeals cleared and decisions overturned at appeal for people with a primary disabling condition of multiple sclerosis by year of initial decision</em></p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Number of decisions</p></td><td><p>Number of MRs registered</p></td><td><p>Number of appeals cleared</p></td><td><p>Number of decisions overturned at appeal</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2014</p></td><td><p>480</p></td><td><p>90</p></td><td><p>20</p></td><td><p>20</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2015</p></td><td><p>1,950</p></td><td><p>470</p></td><td><p>220</p></td><td><p>180</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2016</p></td><td><p>9,840</p></td><td><p>1,960</p></td><td><p>780</p></td><td><p>640</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2017</p></td><td><p>10,540</p></td><td><p>1,990</p></td><td><p>660</p></td><td><p>560</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2018 (January to June)</p></td><td><p>3,980</p></td><td><p>580</p></td><td><p>10</p></td><td><p>10</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p>Table 2 below shows the number of PIP new claims for people with a primary disabling condition of multiple sclerosis who did not receive an award at the initial decision post assessment and where the decision was changed at MR or appeal.</p><p> </p><p><em>Table 2: Number of PIP new claims decisions for people who did not receive an award at the initial decision post assessment where the award was changed at mandatory reconsideration (MR) and where decisions were overturned at appeal for people with a primary disabling condition of multiple sclerosis by year of initial decision</em></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Number of decisions</p></td><td><p>Number of decisions where the award was changed at MR</p></td><td><p>Number of appeals cleared</p></td><td><p>Number of decisions overturned at appeal</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>70</p></td><td><p>10</p></td><td><p>10</p></td><td><p>10</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2014</p></td><td><p>850</p></td><td><p>60</p></td><td><p>100</p></td><td><p>70</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2015</p></td><td><p>1,550</p></td><td><p>90</p></td><td><p>210</p></td><td><p>150</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2016</p></td><td><p>1,290</p></td><td><p>60</p></td><td><p>210</p></td><td><p>140</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2017</p></td><td><p>1,350</p></td><td><p>60</p></td><td><p>160</p></td><td><p>110</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2018 (January to June)</p></td><td><p>810</p></td><td><p>20</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>#</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p>Since PIP was introduced 3.5m decisions have been made until June 2018, of these 9% have been appealed and 4% have been overturned.</p><p> </p><p>Data on the number of people who had the mobility award increased from none or standard rate to the enhanced rate is available from internal analytical datasets, but to assess the completeness of recording and quality assure the figures to answer this PQ would incur disproportionate cost.</p><p>Data has been rounded to the nearest 10. Components may not sum to totals due to rounding.</p><p>'#' fewer than 5 decisions in this category.</p><p>The data relates to MRs and appeals recorded up to June 2018 (the latest published data on appeals). Claimants who have received benefit decisions more recently may not yet have had time to complete the claimant journey and progress to appeal.</p><p>PIP data includes normal rules and special rules for the terminally ill claimants, and is for both new claims and DLA reassessment claims.</p><p>Data is based on primary disabling condition as recorded on the PIP computer system. Claimants may often have multiple disabling conditions upon which the decision is based but only the primary condition is shown in these statistics.</p><p>Appeals data shown in the tables is taken from the DWP PIP computer system’s management information. Therefore this appeals data may differ from that held by Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service for various reasons such as delays in data recording and other methodological differences in collating and preparing statistics.</p><p>Some decisions which are changed at mandatory reconsideration, and where the claimant continues to appeal for a higher PIP award, are then changed again at tribunal appeal. Therefore the number of people who had a decision changed at mandatory reconsideration and the number of people who had a decision changed at tribunal appeal cannot be added together.</p><p>Decisions overturned at appeal may include a number of appeals that have been lapsed (which is where DWP changed the decision after an appeal was lodged but before it was heard at Tribunal).</p> answering member constituency Truro and Falmouth answering member printed Sarah Newton grouped question UIN 180082 180083 question first answered 22/10/2018 17:12:58 answering member 4071 label Biography information for Sarah Newton
tabling member	163 label Biography information for Sir Stephen Timms

988892

registered interest
date	16/10/2018
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Personal Independence Payment: Multiple Sclerosis
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many people with multiple sclerosis who were in receipt of disability living allowance and have undergone a reassessment for personal independence payments appealed the decision at tribunal and (a) had their decision overturned and (b) had their mobility award increased from none or standard rate to the higher rate.
tabling member constituency	East Ham
tabling member printed	Stephen Timms
uin	180082
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 22/10/2018 answer text <p>Table 1 below shows the number of Personal Independence Payment (PIP) reassessment decisions, mandatory reconsideration (MR) registrations, appeals cleared and decisions overturned at appeal for people with a primary disabling condition of multiple sclerosis.</p><p> </p><p><em>Table 1: Number of PIP reassessment decisions, mandatory reconsideration (MR) registrations, appeals cleared and decisions overturned at appeal for people with a primary disabling condition of multiple sclerosis by year of initial decision</em></p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Number of decisions</p></td><td><p>Number of MRs registered</p></td><td><p>Number of appeals cleared</p></td><td><p>Number of decisions overturned at appeal</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2014</p></td><td><p>480</p></td><td><p>90</p></td><td><p>20</p></td><td><p>20</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2015</p></td><td><p>1,950</p></td><td><p>470</p></td><td><p>220</p></td><td><p>180</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2016</p></td><td><p>9,840</p></td><td><p>1,960</p></td><td><p>780</p></td><td><p>640</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2017</p></td><td><p>10,540</p></td><td><p>1,990</p></td><td><p>660</p></td><td><p>560</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2018 (January to June)</p></td><td><p>3,980</p></td><td><p>580</p></td><td><p>10</p></td><td><p>10</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p>Table 2 below shows the number of PIP new claims for people with a primary disabling condition of multiple sclerosis who did not receive an award at the initial decision post assessment and where the decision was changed at MR or appeal.</p><p> </p><p><em>Table 2: Number of PIP new claims decisions for people who did not receive an award at the initial decision post assessment where the award was changed at mandatory reconsideration (MR) and where decisions were overturned at appeal for people with a primary disabling condition of multiple sclerosis by year of initial decision</em></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Number of decisions</p></td><td><p>Number of decisions where the award was changed at MR</p></td><td><p>Number of appeals cleared</p></td><td><p>Number of decisions overturned at appeal</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>70</p></td><td><p>10</p></td><td><p>10</p></td><td><p>10</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2014</p></td><td><p>850</p></td><td><p>60</p></td><td><p>100</p></td><td><p>70</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2015</p></td><td><p>1,550</p></td><td><p>90</p></td><td><p>210</p></td><td><p>150</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2016</p></td><td><p>1,290</p></td><td><p>60</p></td><td><p>210</p></td><td><p>140</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2017</p></td><td><p>1,350</p></td><td><p>60</p></td><td><p>160</p></td><td><p>110</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2018 (January to June)</p></td><td><p>810</p></td><td><p>20</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>#</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p>Since PIP was introduced 3.5m decisions have been made until June 2018, of these 9% have been appealed and 4% have been overturned.</p><p> </p><p>Data on the number of people who had the mobility award increased from none or standard rate to the enhanced rate is available from internal analytical datasets, but to assess the completeness of recording and quality assure the figures to answer this PQ would incur disproportionate cost.</p><p>Data has been rounded to the nearest 10. Components may not sum to totals due to rounding.</p><p>'#' fewer than 5 decisions in this category.</p><p>The data relates to MRs and appeals recorded up to June 2018 (the latest published data on appeals). Claimants who have received benefit decisions more recently may not yet have had time to complete the claimant journey and progress to appeal.</p><p>PIP data includes normal rules and special rules for the terminally ill claimants, and is for both new claims and DLA reassessment claims.</p><p>Data is based on primary disabling condition as recorded on the PIP computer system. Claimants may often have multiple disabling conditions upon which the decision is based but only the primary condition is shown in these statistics.</p><p>Appeals data shown in the tables is taken from the DWP PIP computer system’s management information. Therefore this appeals data may differ from that held by Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service for various reasons such as delays in data recording and other methodological differences in collating and preparing statistics.</p><p>Some decisions which are changed at mandatory reconsideration, and where the claimant continues to appeal for a higher PIP award, are then changed again at tribunal appeal. Therefore the number of people who had a decision changed at mandatory reconsideration and the number of people who had a decision changed at tribunal appeal cannot be added together.</p><p>Decisions overturned at appeal may include a number of appeals that have been lapsed (which is where DWP changed the decision after an appeal was lodged but before it was heard at Tribunal).</p> answering member constituency Truro and Falmouth answering member printed Sarah Newton grouped question UIN 180081 180083 question first answered 22/10/2018 17:12:58 answering member 4071 label Biography information for Sarah Newton
tabling member	163 label Biography information for Sir Stephen Timms

988893

registered interest
date	16/10/2018
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Personal Independence Payment: Multiple Sclerosis
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many new personal independence payment claimants with multiple sclerosis did not receive an award during their initial personal independence payment assessment and subsequently received an award at (a) mandatory reconsideration and (b) tribunal for each year since 2013.
tabling member constituency	East Ham
tabling member printed	Stephen Timms
uin	180083
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 22/10/2018 answer text <p>Table 1 below shows the number of Personal Independence Payment (PIP) reassessment decisions, mandatory reconsideration (MR) registrations, appeals cleared and decisions overturned at appeal for people with a primary disabling condition of multiple sclerosis.</p><p> </p><p><em>Table 1: Number of PIP reassessment decisions, mandatory reconsideration (MR) registrations, appeals cleared and decisions overturned at appeal for people with a primary disabling condition of multiple sclerosis by year of initial decision</em></p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Number of decisions</p></td><td><p>Number of MRs registered</p></td><td><p>Number of appeals cleared</p></td><td><p>Number of decisions overturned at appeal</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2014</p></td><td><p>480</p></td><td><p>90</p></td><td><p>20</p></td><td><p>20</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2015</p></td><td><p>1,950</p></td><td><p>470</p></td><td><p>220</p></td><td><p>180</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2016</p></td><td><p>9,840</p></td><td><p>1,960</p></td><td><p>780</p></td><td><p>640</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2017</p></td><td><p>10,540</p></td><td><p>1,990</p></td><td><p>660</p></td><td><p>560</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2018 (January to June)</p></td><td><p>3,980</p></td><td><p>580</p></td><td><p>10</p></td><td><p>10</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p>Table 2 below shows the number of PIP new claims for people with a primary disabling condition of multiple sclerosis who did not receive an award at the initial decision post assessment and where the decision was changed at MR or appeal.</p><p> </p><p><em>Table 2: Number of PIP new claims decisions for people who did not receive an award at the initial decision post assessment where the award was changed at mandatory reconsideration (MR) and where decisions were overturned at appeal for people with a primary disabling condition of multiple sclerosis by year of initial decision</em></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Number of decisions</p></td><td><p>Number of decisions where the award was changed at MR</p></td><td><p>Number of appeals cleared</p></td><td><p>Number of decisions overturned at appeal</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>70</p></td><td><p>10</p></td><td><p>10</p></td><td><p>10</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2014</p></td><td><p>850</p></td><td><p>60</p></td><td><p>100</p></td><td><p>70</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2015</p></td><td><p>1,550</p></td><td><p>90</p></td><td><p>210</p></td><td><p>150</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2016</p></td><td><p>1,290</p></td><td><p>60</p></td><td><p>210</p></td><td><p>140</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2017</p></td><td><p>1,350</p></td><td><p>60</p></td><td><p>160</p></td><td><p>110</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2018 (January to June)</p></td><td><p>810</p></td><td><p>20</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>#</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p>Since PIP was introduced 3.5m decisions have been made until June 2018, of these 9% have been appealed and 4% have been overturned.</p><p> </p><p>Data on the number of people who had the mobility award increased from none or standard rate to the enhanced rate is available from internal analytical datasets, but to assess the completeness of recording and quality assure the figures to answer this PQ would incur disproportionate cost.</p><p>Data has been rounded to the nearest 10. Components may not sum to totals due to rounding.</p><p>'#' fewer than 5 decisions in this category.</p><p>The data relates to MRs and appeals recorded up to June 2018 (the latest published data on appeals). Claimants who have received benefit decisions more recently may not yet have had time to complete the claimant journey and progress to appeal.</p><p>PIP data includes normal rules and special rules for the terminally ill claimants, and is for both new claims and DLA reassessment claims.</p><p>Data is based on primary disabling condition as recorded on the PIP computer system. Claimants may often have multiple disabling conditions upon which the decision is based but only the primary condition is shown in these statistics.</p><p>Appeals data shown in the tables is taken from the DWP PIP computer system’s management information. Therefore this appeals data may differ from that held by Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service for various reasons such as delays in data recording and other methodological differences in collating and preparing statistics.</p><p>Some decisions which are changed at mandatory reconsideration, and where the claimant continues to appeal for a higher PIP award, are then changed again at tribunal appeal. Therefore the number of people who had a decision changed at mandatory reconsideration and the number of people who had a decision changed at tribunal appeal cannot be added together.</p><p>Decisions overturned at appeal may include a number of appeals that have been lapsed (which is where DWP changed the decision after an appeal was lodged but before it was heard at Tribunal).</p> answering member constituency Truro and Falmouth answering member printed Sarah Newton grouped question UIN 180081 180082 question first answered 22/10/2018 17:12:58 answering member 4071 label Biography information for Sarah Newton
tabling member	163 label Biography information for Sir Stephen Timms

985775

registered interest
date	11/10/2018
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Department for Work and Pensions: Written Questions
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what cost threshold her Department uses to determine which parliamentary questions should not be answered on disproportionate cost grounds.
tabling member constituency	East Ham
tabling member printed	Stephen Timms
uin	178220
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 16/10/2018 answer text <p>The Department for Work and Pensions follows guidance from Cabinet Office in setting the Disproportionate Cost Threshold (DCT). Since 1991 the threshold has been set at eight times the average marginal cost of answering Written Parliamentary Questions. Marginal cost is judged as the direct cost of Civil Servants' time. The threshold is increased in £50 steps to avoid the need for frequent small changes. The current Disproportionate Cost Threshold across Government is £850.</p> answering member constituency North Swindon answering member printed Justin Tomlinson question first answered 16/10/2018 09:27:55 answering member 4105 label Biography information for Justin Tomlinson
tabling member	163 label Biography information for Sir Stephen Timms

985777

registered interest
date	11/10/2018
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Universal Credit: Terminal Illnesses
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether her Department has a fast track process to ensure that a claimant who has submitted a DS1500 receives the first Universal Credit payment within seven days; and if she will make a statement.
tabling member constituency	East Ham
tabling member printed	Stephen Timms
uin	178221
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 22/10/2018 answer text <p>The Department and the Universal Credit Programme have regular meetings with key stakeholders to understand how our policies are working and discuss potential areas for improvement. The design of Universal Credit for terminally ill claimants is based on the well tested processes that have been in place in Employment and Support Allowance, as have the documentation of illness requirements. We will continue to keep these under review to ensure that they work as effectively as possible.</p><p> </p><p>If the claimant does not have a DS1500 but is deemed as terminally ill then we will fast track the Work Capability Assessment process so that the report is provided within 48 hours.</p><p> </p><p>If a claimant has been diagnosed as terminally ill with a prognosis of 6 months or less and been provided with a DS1500 or one has already been provided, Universal Credit will automatically award the Limited Capability for Work and Work Related Activity element without the requirement to refer this for a Work Capability Assessment decision.</p><p> </p><p>All claimants are able to apply for an advance of their Universal Credit to ensure they do not face financial hardship whilst they are awaiting the assessment of their Universal Credit award.</p> answering member constituency Reading West answering member printed Alok Sharma question first answered 22/10/2018 11:03:36 answering member 4014 label Biography information for Sir Alok Sharma previous answer version 78969 answering member constituency Reading West answering member printed Alok Sharma answering member 4014 label Biography information for Sir Alok Sharma
tabling member	163 label Biography information for Sir Stephen Timms

985780

registered interest
date	11/10/2018
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Universal Credit: Terminal Illnesses
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many claimants who have submitted a DS1500 form have waited (i) two weeks; (ii) three weeks; (iii) four weeks; (iv) five weeks or more to receive their first Universal Credit payment in the most recent twelve month period for which data are available.
tabling member constituency	East Ham
tabling member printed	Stephen Timms
uin	178222
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 22/10/2018 answer text <p>The information requested is not readily available, as it is not collated centrally, and to provide it would incur disproportionate cost.</p> answering member constituency Reading West answering member printed Alok Sharma question first answered 22/10/2018 11:08:16 answering member 4014 label Biography information for Sir Alok Sharma previous answer version 78971 answering member constituency Reading West answering member printed Alok Sharma answering member 4014 label Biography information for Sir Alok Sharma
tabling member	163 label Biography information for Sir Stephen Timms