THE fear is a constant companion. It’s not the fear of an illness worsening, or the fear of a new financial crisis — those are daily realities many claimants manage. This is a different kind of fear: the cold, administrative dread that comes from knowing a single, minor mistake could strip away the only financial lifeline they have.

This is the fear of the universal credit (UC) sanctions regime, a system that a new report by the Public Law Project and Central England’s Law Centre, Sanctionable Failures: Universal Credit’s Failing Sanctions Regime and the Harm It Causes, reveals is not just flawed, but fundamentally disproportionate, harmful, and in most cases unlawful.

The report, based on the experiences of claimants supported by the Central England Law Centre and DWP data, provides damning evidence that the benefits system is waging war on the poorest sections of society. Since taking office Labour has overseen an average monthly number of 51,607 sanctions imposed, which is higher than the last 10 months of the previous Tory government.

The Disproportionate Penalty for Human Error

The core injustice of the sanctions system is its severity. The report notes that sanctions are “usually imposed for minor ‘failings’,” yet the consequences are “severe.” A sanction means losing 100 per cent of the UC standard allowance for weeks or even months. This is a penalty so extreme that the report rightly points out it “exceed[s] the average criminal fine.”

The financial disparity is shocking. The report notes that the average court fine for a criminal offence issued in 2024 was £283. However, a single UC claimant aged 25 or over sanctioned for the median period in May 2025 (four to 13 weeks) lost a staggering £524. For a minor administrative failure, a claimant is punished almost twice as severely as the average criminal fine.

Even more shocking is the cruelty of the financial sanctions. A claimant subject to a sanction loses 100 per cent of their standard allowance, which for a single person aged 25 or over is £91.70 a week.

This disproportionate penalty is applied for reasons that are often minor. The report highlights that a staggering 90.8 per cent of sanctions were issued for simply “missing or being late to an interview with a work coach.” As the report concludes, sanctions are applied for “first-time ‘failures,’ often in circumstances or for reasons beyond an individual’s control.”

These are not acts of defiance; they are the unavoidable realities of living with a disability or in poverty. Yet, the system treats them as a deliberate refusal to engage. The punishment does not fit the crime. A minor administrative slip-up, a missed appointment due to illness, is met with a financial death sentence. This report confirms that Labour’s claim that sanctions are used “only as a last resort” is simply untrue. It demonstrates that sanctions are a first resort, applied for minor, often unavoidable, failures without adequate safeguards.

The government’s response to a Commons work and pensions committee report on the sanctions regime was to largely dismiss the committee’s recommendations, including those to pause the expansion of the regime and to conduct a review of the evidence on the effectiveness of sanctions. This dismissive attitude shows a clear lack of political will to address the suffering caused by this policy.

The Harm is Real: Poverty, Debt, Despair and Death

The most devastating section of the report details the human cost, confirming what every sanctioned claimant knows: sanctions are a direct route to destitution. The report calls it a “harmful system,” and the evidence is heartbreaking.

When your entire standard allowance is removed, the choice is simple: eat or pay rent. The report’s research participants said that sanctions meant they had to “use foodbanks and/or incur debt.” For many working-class people, this financial shock wave is catastrophic. It means missing meals, cutting back on essential heating or not paying essential bills.

The impact goes far beyond the bank balance. Participants also reported negative impacts on their physical and mental health, housing stability and on their ability to search for and undertake work. The system claims to be helping people into work, but by plunging them into crisis, it makes the prospect of work an impossible dream.

One interviewee’s experience is a stark reminder of the collateral damage. She said that  “her children were distressed at seeing her not having enough to eat. It was a big impact on her family, especially for the children.” This is the true face of the sanctions regime: not a tough-love policy, but a mechanism for inflicting trauma on vulnerable working-class families.

We should also bear in mind that sanctions have killed many benefit claimants over the last 15 years. John Pring, editor of the Disability News Service, in his book The Department revealed how sanctions have directly caused the deaths of hundreds of desperately poor working-class people.

An Unsound System: Proving the DWP Wrong

Perhaps the most damning indictment of the sanctions regime is the report’s finding that it is “unsound.” This is not just about the harshness of the rules, but the sheer injustice of their application.
The research found a high overturn rate on appeal, with 86 per cent of cases resolved in favour of the claimant. Let that sink in. Eight out of 10 sanctions that were challenged were found to have been unlawfully imposed by the DWP. This statistic proves that the vast majority of sanctions that are challenged are unlawful and “should never have been imposed at all, even within the terms of the current strict regime.”

This statistic is a powerful weapon against the narrative of the Labour government which oversees the “Department for War on the Poor” (DWP). It proves that the system is riddled with errors, misjudgements, and a failure to properly consider the claimant’s circumstances.

The report highlights the systemic failings that lead to these errors, including the issue of support conversations. The DWP relies heavily on the online journal, which is inaccessible for many with cognitive or physical impairments, and financial constraints. The online journal fails to allow claimants to properly explain their circumstances.

The Unequal Burden on the Vulnerable

The DWP is currently consulting on whether to apply sanctions to disabled claimants and those with health conditions, claiming they would be used “only as a last resort.” The findings of this report should serve as a clear, resounding answer: No.
For those of us with Limited Capability for Work or Limited Capability for Work and Work-Related Activity, the threat is particularly insidious. While the DWP claims to have safeguards, the report shows they are totally insufficient. The very act of managing a chronic condition — the fatigue, the pain, the cognitive fog—is what makes it difficult to comply with the rigid, often digital-first demands of the UC system.
This is a system that penalises those who struggle with written communication, digital literacy, or simply need a human conversation to explain their circumstances.

A Call for Revocation and Reform

The Sanctionable Failures report is not just a critique; it is a call to action. The Public Law Project and Central England Law Centre are unequivocal in their primary recommendation: The current sanctions regime fails on its own terms and should be scrapped.

Until the sanctions regime is either revoked or fundamentally reformed, the fear will remain, and working-class lives will continue to be pushed to the very edge of survival. Thankfully there is growing opposition to Labour’s sanctions regime.

Tomorrow, November 26, Unite Community is having a national day of protest against cuts to benefits and the sanctions regime. There will be a protest outside Parliament and local protests all over the country. All are welcome to join these protests against Labour’s war on the poor.