Hmm, interesting point. My first thought was that the reinstatement of HB on appeal/revision would retrospectively engage Reg 8, but if that were the case why is Reg 13 necessary? Does the existence of Reg 13 suggest that Reg 8 only applies where an HB award exists in “real time” on the day of the UC claim?
If Reg 8 doesn’t apply to an HB award reinstated after the date of the UC claim, there does seem to be a lacuna in the wording of Reg 13 that excludes unsuccessful UC claims. It is also interesting that Reg 13 provides DWP with grounds to revise a UC decision in the light of the outcome of an HB appeal/recon. You might expect that such a power would most likely be needed where the UC claim was rejected for the same issue as a legacy benefit – a dispute about capital for example. If Reg 13 doesn’t apply to unsuccessful UC claims, the scope of that power to revise is greatly diminished.
This would make an interesting appeal case.
