Universal Credit Sanctions Are Hitting Claimants Harder Than Criminal Fines
Over the past year and a half, more than 600,000 households in the UK have had their Universal Credit payments reduced or suspended, highlighting growing concerns over the Department for Work and Pensions’ approach to sanctions. From February 2024 to July 2025, a total of 622,000 individuals were affected, meaning their financial support was either cut or temporarily withheld. For many, this came after missing mandatory interviews or failing to meet requirements that they may have struggled to navigate due to health, digital, or language barriers.
Recent research from the Public Law Project has revealed just how severe these sanctions can be. On average, a single claimant over 25 loses around £525 during the median sanction period, which is almost double the £283 average criminal court fine in 2024. Unlike court fines, which can often be paid in installments, Universal Credit sanctions take 100% of the weekly benefit, which for many is £91.70. Experts warn that the impact is far more damaging than criminal fines because it directly affects the claimants’ ability to meet basic living costs and maintain stability.
Also Read:- Brian Johnson Joins Mark Tremonti for a Surprise Led Zeppelin Jam
- Nike Launches Caitlin Clark Kobe 6 Protro on Nov 12
Advocates argue that the current system is failing vulnerable people. Caroline Selman, a senior researcher at the Public Law Project, has emphasized that sanctions often punish people for circumstances beyond their control, such as health emergencies or difficulties navigating an unfamiliar benefits system. More than four out of five sanctions appealed—about 86%—are overturned, suggesting the issue lies not with non-compliance but with a system that applies penalties too readily. Claire Stern, deputy chief executive of the Central England Law Centre, points out that these sanctions can push people into debt, reliance on food banks, and worsen their mental and physical health, all of which further hinders their ability to seek and maintain employment.
The DWP maintains that sanctions are intended to encourage engagement with work and support services, and that safeguards exist to protect vulnerable claimants. However, critics argue that the reality experienced by those affected is very different. Long delays in tribunal hearings, averaging seven months, mean that even when sanctions are later overturned, the harm and financial hardship have already taken a heavy toll.
Calls are growing for a fundamental overhaul of the sanctions system. Recommendations include revoking the current regime entirely or, at the very least, reforming it so sanctions are only ever used as a last resort, after clear warnings. Additional safeguards, better access to appeal processes, and greater transparency about who is affected are also being urged. Advocates stress that a fairer, more understanding system could help people maintain stability while still encouraging engagement with employment support, rather than penalizing them for circumstances they cannot control.
In a time of rising costs and economic uncertainty, the debate over Universal Credit sanctions highlights a crucial question: should the safety net for vulnerable citizens be punitive, or should it provide real support for people trying to get back on their feet? The answer, many argue, is long overdue.
Read More:
0 Comments