UK Claims Database
Who said it, what they said, and what the verified data shows — national and local.
7 published entries are shown here. 48 further entries are drafts under editorial review and are not public. A draft is published only after its figures are checked against their primary sources, as described in our methodology. Publication status describes the existing editorial record. It does not certify a separate source check, calculation check or independent review. See the recorded checks in our methodology.
Claims database and fact checks: what is the difference?
This is the claims database: a searchable list of individual claims, each with a short rating, the figures it rests on and links to the data. The fact checks are longer articles that set out how a claim was checked. Both show published entries only, and a claim can appear in both.
Showing 7 of 7 claims.
A widely shared thread describing a brother and partner, neither working, with four children, claiming housing, unemployment, two PIP awards and Carer's Allowance totalling "in excess of £3k a month", funding holidays in Lanzarote, regular meals out and salon visits.
@UKwantsmore (X (formerly Twitter)) — X, over 91,000 views
A private family's finances cannot be verified, so the account itself is unproven either way. Two things in it are checkable. £3,000 a month is £36,000 a year, well above the £22,020 family cap outside London — consistent with the two PIP awards and Carer's Allowance described, all of which exempt a household from the cap by law. And PIP is not an unemployment benefit: it is assessed on the extra costs of disability, is unaffected by work, and cannot be claimed simply by choosing not to work. The claim that a household is "fully capable of work" while receiving two PIP awards is an assertion about a medical assessment the author has not seen.
Verify against: GOV.UK, When you are not affected by the benefit cap · GOV.UK, Personal Independence Payment · Original post
"No child in the UK lives in poverty. Having a free house to live in and hundreds of pounds each month is not living in poverty. This BS poverty narrative needs to stop."
Reply on a viral benefits thread (X (formerly Twitter)) — X
UK child poverty is measured and published annually by the Department for Work and Pensions in Households Below Average Income, using a defined threshold of 60% of median household income after housing costs. The most recent statistics record millions of children below it. The commenter is entitled to argue the threshold is the wrong measure — it is relative, so it moves with median incomes — but "no child lives in poverty" contradicts the official statistics rather than reinterpreting them.
Verify against: DWP, Households Below Average Income
"These benefits are tax free whereas my state pension is counted towards my tax free figure... Benefits should be classed as income and taxed accordingly."
Reply on a viral benefits thread (X (formerly Twitter)) — X
The factual part of this is correct, and included here for that reason. The State Pension is taxable income and counts against the personal allowance, while PIP, DLA, Attendance Allowance and Universal Credit are not taxed. The reason is that disability benefits are not intended as income at all — they are compensation for the extra costs of being disabled, such as transport, heating and care, so taxing them would erode the amount calculated as needed. Whether that principle should extend to all working-age benefits is a legitimate policy argument. The description of the current rules is accurate.
Verify against: GOV.UK, Tax on income you get from your pension · GOV.UK, Income Tax: taxable and non-taxable state benefits
A screenshot showing "Total benefits entitlement £1,151.90 weekly" is shared with the caption "why would I get a job" and "living my best life" — presented as proof a claimant receives a month's wages every week.
Viral video and reaction stitches (Facebook / TikTok) — Facebook, shared widely via reaction videos
£1,151.90 a week is £59,899 a year, which is far above the benefit cap of £486.98 a week even in London. A household can only receive that much if it is exempt from the cap, and the exemptions are set by law: receipt of PIP, DLA, Attendance Allowance, Carer's Allowance, the ESA support component, Industrial Injuries benefits or war pensions, or combined earnings of £881 a month or more. A total this size therefore describes a large household in which someone is disabled — and much of it is rent paid to a landlord and disability costs, not spending money. It is not what a single unemployed adult receives: for them the cap is £283.71 a week outside London.
Verify against: GOV.UK, Benefit cap amounts · GOV.UK, When you are not affected by the benefit cap
A table listing PIP, Universal Credit, child elements, DLA and housing support totalling £48,500 a year, captioned "£48,500 for sitting at home." Commenters calculate you would need a £64,000 salary to take home the same.
Widely shared breakdown post (Facebook) — Facebook
The arithmetic may add up; the label does not. £48,500 is £932.69 a week, roughly double the benefit cap, so the household is exempt — and the listed PIP and DLA are exactly why. Neither is an out-of-work benefit. Both are paid to cover the extra costs of disability and continue in full when the recipient works, so they are not payment for "sitting at home". The housing element is rent, which passes to a landlord. Comparing the total to a £64,000 salary also compares a whole household against one individual's pay.
Verify against: GOV.UK, When you are not affected by the benefit cap · GOV.UK, Personal Independence Payment
"It is time to stop giving benefits to people who choose lifestyle unemployment. Share if you agree." — with comments proposing that claimants be made to do street cleaning.
Shared meme (Facebook) — Facebook
The premise is that benefit spending mainly supports people choosing not to work. It does not. Most social security spending goes to pensioners, and most of the rest goes to disabled people, carers, children, housing costs and people who are in work but low paid. Unemployment benefit for people looking for work is a small share of the total. The policy proposal may still be argued for, but it is aimed at a much smaller group than the claim implies.
Verify against: DWP, Benefit expenditure and caseload tables
The Southport dance-class attacker was named "Ali Al-Shakati", a Muslim asylum seeker who arrived in the UK by small boat.
Channel3Now and pseudonymous X accounts (Social media) — Channel3Now website, then X — over 30,000 mentions from over 18,000 accounts within roughly 24 hours
The name and every detail attached to it were false. Merseyside Police publicly stated on 30 July 2024 that the circulating name was incorrect. The real suspect, Axel Muganwa Rudakubana — a UK-born 17-year-old — was formally named on 1 August 2024 once reporting restrictions were lifted, three days after the attack, with the presiding judge citing the ongoing spread of misinformation as a reason to do so early. Who originated the false name is itself unresolved: Pakistani police arrested a Channel3Now-linked individual on 20 August 2024 and dropped the case six days later for lack of evidence he was the source.
Verify against: Full Fact, "Incorrect name for Southport stabbings suspect circulates online" · Institute for Strategic Dialogue, "From rumours to riots" · Wikipedia, "2024 Southport stabbings"
How the false name spread, and what the algorithm did and did not do →
Seen a claim that needs checking?
Send it over. We prioritise claims by reach, public importance, and whether they can actually be checked against published data — so a link to where you saw it helps more than anything.
Send us a claim →We cannot check everything, and we do not check claims that name private individuals rather than public figures.