Around two million people will miss out on around £1,500 in backpay after the High Court rejected a landmark challenge brought by benefits claimants.
The case was brought by four benefits claimants who argued that those on some legacy benefits were being discriminated against due to not being included in a £20 universal credit uplift, the Daily Mirror reports.
The extra cash was given to universal credit claimants from April, 2020, to October 2021, to help them pay for additional costs incurred during the coronavirus crisis and subsequent lockdowns.
Read more : The new universal credit rules around looking for a job
However, this was not extended to those on older benefits like employment support allowance (ESA), income support and jobseeker's allowance (JSA), prompting a legal challenge by four claimants last October.
But a High Court judge ruled on Friday that the policy was not unlawful discrimination that breached the European Convention on Human Rights.
Mr Justice Swift admitted legacy benefits were "low", and "it is obvious that any person required to rely only on that level of income will suffer hardship".
But he said the "difference in treatment" between universal credit and legacy claimants was "justified", because it was aimed at people who suddenly lost their job due to Covid.
The four claimants' solicitor, William Ford, of Osbornes Law, said: “We are extremely disappointed by today’s judgement and will study it carefully to assess whether there are any grounds to appeal.
"The court’s decision is a devastating blow to more than two million people who we consider were unjustly deprived of the £20 uplift given to those who receive universal credit during the pandemic. It is deeply unfair that those on so called legacy benefits should be discriminated against in this way.”
Anela Anwar, of welfare rights group Z2K, said: “It is immensely disappointing to see this challenge dismissed, especially given that the court accepted there had been discrimination against disabled people in the DWP’s approach.
“The cost-of-living crisis is not going away, and benefit levels remain totally inadequate."
Anastasia Berry of the MS Society, who co-chairs the Disability Benefits Consortium, said it was a "colossal blow" to 2.2 million people.
"The government has found a legal technicality to temporarily duck responsibility," she said. "The basic fact remains that it stood idly by while many disabled people were forced deeper into poverty during the pandemic."
She said Tory ministers were now "heaping insult on injury" by raising benefits by 3.1% in April, around half the inflation rate.
One of the four claimants, 41-year-old Phil Wayland, from Rochford, Essex, told the Mirror in November the government’s behaviour had been “inhuman”.
Find out about food banks in your area:
Mr Wayland, who has claimed ESA since 2010 for depression and anxiety, said before the hearing: "I had just had enough of seeing the rise in food banks and seeing how a couple of million disabled people, the most vulnerable, have been deliberately ignored.”
Today he added: "I am extremely disappointed with the judge’s decision."
The four claimants were on employment and support allowance (ESA), income support and jobseekers’ allowance. Their lawyers claimed that if their judicial review was successful, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) could be forced to make back payments to those hit.
The case was backed by the Disability Benefits Consortium (DBC) - a network of over 100 organisations including Z2K, the MS Society, MND Association, and Leonard Cheshire - as well as Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC).
But Mr Justice Smith ruled: “The increase to the standard allowance was a way of providing additional support to those who did lose jobs or income because of the pandemic and became reliant on universal credit for the first time. This group would face particular disruption. The increase was intended to cushion the sudden impact of loss of employment or reduced employment. I accept this was a legitimate objective.”
He added: “New benefits claimants would need to adjust to a loss in income. They would be affected differently to persons already claiming benefits."
The judge accepted that the £20-a-week also helped millions of universal credit claimants who were already on the benefit, but said this did not change his view of the law.
The court had heard the exclusion was a "radical departure" from decades of benefits policy, "with almost no democratic scrutiny and limited analysis of the consequences".
Lawyers argued the DWP’s excuse that it could not raise legacy benefits overnight due to more complex computer systems was not “justified”.
Shadow Minister for Disabled People, Vicky Foxcroft, said: "Conservative ministers' decision to not extend the £20 uplift to people on legacy benefits was unjust. It was a choice that hit disabled people the hardest when they needed support the most.
"Shockingly, there are now over one million more disabled people living in poverty than in 2010. But the Tories continue to ignore the struggle they face with the cost of living crisis Boris Johnson's government has created.”
A DWP spokesperson said: “We welcome that the court found in our favour. The temporary £20 uplift for universal credit claimants ensured vital support was given to those facing the most financial disruption due to the pandemic.”
To get the latest email updates from WalesOnline click here.
