Repository navigation
UC LCWRA element: joint claimants who both have LCWRA get two elements; reg. 27(4) allows one #2429
Description
What's wrong
uc_LCWRA_element (variables/gov/dwp/universal_credit/disability_element/limited_work_ability/uc_LCWRA_element.py) sums the element over every claimant in the benefit unit (benunit.sum(person_amounts)). Joint claimants who both have limited capability for work and work-related activity get two LCWRA elements.
The law
In the case of joint claimants, where each of them has limited capability for work and work-related activity, (a) the award is only to include one LCWRA element, and (b) where the LCWRA element for each of them is a different amount, the LCWRA element to be included is the higher amount.
Reproducer (branch uc-lcwra-post-2029, same formula as main)
A couple, both aged 40, both with uc_limited_capability_for_WRA: true, in 2025: uc_LCWRA_element is £846.54 a month, two × £423.27. It should be £423.27.
Where it bites
The formula decides the award wherever universal_credit_july_2025_reform does not overwrite it: every year before 2026-27 (2025-26 included), years after the data's projection, and any year with rebalancing.active false. In 2026-27 to 2029-30, and to 2032-33 with #2428, the scenario sets one amount per benefit unit, which is right.
#2428's impact run shows the size of it in 2030-31: on #2284, where the formula decides 2030-31, about 33,000 households (164,000 people) are paid a second element, about £2,600 a year each (£86m in total). With #2428 the scenario sets one.
Expected
One element per benefit unit, the higher of the claimants' amounts: benunit.max rather than benunit.sum, with a YAML case for the couple above. The fix moves the 2025-26 baseline; the size needs a real-data run.
Activity
MaxGhenis commentedon Oct 15, 2026
More than two elements too. The formula sums over every benefit-unit member flagged with LCWRA who is not the other member of a single claim (
other_member_of_single_claim), not only the claimants, so a benefit unit can get three elements.From #2428's real-data runs (Enhanced FRS 1.58.1, 2030-31, the #2284 head where the formula decides that year), per the independent review of #2428, which recomputed it from the saved arrays: the £86m that the scenario stops paying is £70m from new-claimant benefit units the formula paid two elements and £16m from protected benefit units it paid three.
So the fix is one element per benefit unit, taken over the claimants only, at the higher of their amounts (reg. 27(4)(a) and (b)). Arrays:
~/reviews/uk-lcwra-s3-freeze/impact2282/results/(pr2284.npz,pr2282.npz).