Reply To: Tripartite overpayment appeal

#163794
dayglow
Participant

You could try and rely upon House of Lords Judgment of Hinchy v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2015] UKHL 16, at para 32, Lord Hoffmann stated:

 “…The claimant is not concerned or entitled to make any assumptions about the internal administrative arrangements of the department. In particular, she is not entitled to assume the existence of infallible channels of communication between one office and another. Her duty is to comply with what the Tribunal called the “simple instruction” in the order book… …The duty of the claimant is the duty imposed by regulation 32 or implied by section 71 to make disclosure to the person or office identified to the claimant as the decision maker. The latter is not deemed to know anything which he did not actually know.

Therefore the Landlord and Agent had a duty to notify your authority’s designated office of the relevant change in circumstances, namely that were not allowed to charge rent. The claimant could know having received notice of the notice that they were not to be charged rent, and should have also notified the designated office to advise that her landlord was not legally able to charge rent due to the notice being issued.

So yes I consider that they contributed to the overpayment, as they failed to notify the designated office, as the section who issued the notice did not have a duty under reg 88(1) to notify the designated office, and the people who did as stated above are not entitled to make any assumptions about the internal administrative arrangements of the Council and cannot assume the existence of infallible channels of communication between one office and another.

Hope this helps.