Quids in! Pro has launched it’s latest Reader Survey report into the financial wellbeing of the UK’s low income households. The shocking report reveals that 48% of respondents are currently skipping meals due to money issues, a worrying increase of 13% from Quids in!’s last survey in 2016. Deeply worrying is the revelation that of the 48% who are skipping meals, 14% are currently in full time work.

The biennial survey is the fourth conducted by Quids in! Pro and focuses on indicators of future resilience in the context of uncertainty brought about by Universal Credit, Brexit and a volatile global economy.

The 2018 Survey ran from November 2017 to October 2018 and received a total of 396 responses. Responses were collected by post via Quids in! magazine, online at quidsinmagazine.com and at Quids in!’s money training days.

The research reveals that hardship among low income households is highest for those claiming Universal Credit (UC). The anxiety and practical challenges UC has presented already can only grow proportionally worse as it scales up.

The government is reported to be slowing down the roll-out so problems can be ironed out first. Currently one in five claims fail or are significantly delayed, especially where people are more vulnerable. Clearly, if the research by Quids in! of the hardship faced by UC claimants is in any way indicative, this slow down is essential.

---

SHOCKING HARDSHIP FACED BY THOSE WITH THE LEAST

The research exposes shocking hardship faced by those with least. Working age people not in full-time employment, (eg, part-time earners, carers and students, as well as jobseekers and people off work through ill-health), reported:

• 48% were skipping meals (full-time workers: 19%)
• 51% were turning off heating despite being cold (full-time workers: 16%)
• 68% felt frightened, anxious or depressed (full-time workers: 34%)
• 32% felt physically ill (full-time workers: 3%)
• 26% faced serious financial problems (full-time workers: 9%)

Quids in! editor Jeff Mitchell said: “It is going to take us a while to fully comprehend the implications of these findings. Any assumption that welfare support maintains an acceptable quality of life is false. They are shocking but I fear that, for working age people not working full-time, things could get much worse. They do not have the basic protections in place. Twelve per cent of respondents are already on Universal Credit and our findings show a significant increase in hardship for these households.”

THE 3 B’S – INDICATORS OF RESILIENCE

Following its 2016 survey, Quids in! developed its 3 Bs methodology to promote banking, budgeting and being online. It views these as the triple-threat faced by new Universal Credit (UC) claimants but also as the foundations of solid financial resilience. The 2018 research found:

• More than a third (39%) did not use a mainstream bank account, meaning it will be near impossible for them to receive electronic payment or organise direct debits – essential for UC payments where housing benefit is no longer paid direct to landlords
• 74% don’t save for unexpected expenses, although 30% said they use a savings account – meaning few have anything to fall back on if their income or benefits stop (for example, during the five week wait for their first UC payment to made)
• 50% had no home contents insurance, blaming cost (58%) or no expectation of using it (20%)
• 33% had no PC or tablet access to the internet at home and 11% said they had no access at all. (UC claims must be made and managed online)
• Almost half (48%) had fallen behind or struggled to pay bills

FEELING QUIDS IN!

The impact Quids in! made, through its quarterly magazine, its Guide to Universal Credit and its money email service (the Quids In Readers Club), improved dramatically compared to 2016:

• 63% found content useful ‘All the time’ or ‘Often’ (compared to 48% in 2016)
• 55% became ‘more mindful’ of their money after reading Quids in! products – an 66% increase compared to 2016
• 35% would think twice about high cost loans (vs 18%)
• 29% realised they needed help (vs 18%) and 15% decided to get it (vs 8%)​