Concern was expressed that the 2016 reduction in the cap would seriously increase poverty and homelessness among affected families and would affect over 300,000 children. Research by the
Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH) indicated that the number of families affected would be higher than the government expected and warned that continuing the policy would make
Theresa May’s promise of a “society fairer for families” harder to achieve. Terrie Alafat of the CIH feared that many families could face poverty following a redundancy or ill health. She said: “This could have a severe impact on these families, make housing in large sections of the country unaffordable and risk worsening what is already a growing homelessness problem”. Imran Hussain of the
Child Poverty Action Group said: “A lower benefit cap is crueller and more damaging for children". Once the reduction had come into force, fears were expressed that children's life chances would be affected. When the benefit cap was introduced in 2013, the coalition government predicted that it would reduce public expenditure by £225 million by April 2015. Research by the housing charity
Shelter in 2015 indicated that the reduction of the benefit cap in 2016 could affect at least 100,000 households, primarily in Southern England, and the charity expressed concerns that those affected might be subjected to
homelessness and
poverty. In 2017, the
UK Council for Psychotherapy said that benefit cuts and sanctions were "having a toxic impact on mental health". Rates of severe anxiety and depression among unemployed people increased from 10.1% in June 2013 to 15.2% in March 2017. In the general population, the increase was from 3.4% to 4.1%. Statistics published by the
Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) indicated that by 2018, 70% of the households that had been subject to the cap were no longer subject to it, amounting to 54,000 households. In that year independent research was published examining 10,000 benefit-capped households. It estimated that the policy had increased the likelihood of moving into work by 21%. However, only 37% of those no longer subject to the cap had become so due to a higher income. For every child affected by the cap whose parents had moved back into work, eight others were living in worse financial circumstances. Over half of those households subject to the cap remained so for six months or more, and two-thirds of those experienced a shortfall between their monthly income and estimated costs. Overall the average gap between rent and housing benefit for families affected by the cap was £3,750 a year. A study of
council tenants in England affected by the cap indicated that they were two-thirds more likely to be in rent arrears than other tenants claiming housing benefits, and that 28% of all households affected by the cap were receiving a
discretionary housing payment. Analysis of DWP figures published in November 2018 carried out by the Labour Party indicated that single women with one or more dependent children made up over 85% of the householders who had their benefits capped (114,337 of the total 134,044). Overall 120,297 single claimant women had their benefits capped, compared with 13,743 single claimant men. A study published in 2023, which was funded by the
Nuffield Foundation and carried out by the
University of York, indicted that the benefit cap, in conjunction with the country's
two-child policy, had contributed to rising levels of
child poverty in the 2010s. A 2024 study by the
London School of Economics found that the benefit cap typically traps people in poor quality privately rented housing, increasing their levels of poverty, and that it fails to persuade them to gain employment or move to cheaper housing as they usually already live in the cheapest homes in the local area. In consequence, the study says, they often have to use everyday living expenses to cover rental costs, leaving them without adequate clothing and reliant on
food banks. ==Legal challenges==