Terms & Conditions

[emm]

Hi

I have a couple of appeals which are joint working living together cases with the DWP. The DWP have decided that the claimant is no longer entitled to Income Support and in turn we have terminated the claim after offering an undent (with no response).

The claimants now have solicitors working for them and are appealing the overpayment decision for HB/CTB and have provided witness statements from their friends, neighbours etc stating that the claimant has been living alone and her “partner ” has never been resident.

As our decision to terminate was based on the DWP’s decision, I have passed the new info ( witness statements, etc ) to the DWP for reconsideration.

My problem is that I could be waiting forever or a really long time until the DWP reconsider their decision, so what do I do with my appeal in the mean time?

I ‘d like to stay the appeal pending the DWP decision and advise the solicitors of this decision. We could always pend recovery of the O/P and if at a later date the DWP do not change their original decision then I could send it to appeal.

What do you think ?I would welcome any advise if anyone else has had a situation like this,

[aosulliv]

If they haven’t sent an appeal to the DWP than there is no decision to stay. By the sounds of it, you have asked the DWP to get involved, not the claimant

[Anonymous]

How are you getting to your decision that partner is resident?
Has this been declared on a form? In which case the argument that he was “never” there does not seem to hold much water.

Provided you have terminated properly after end of IS, by suspending and then asking for new income details, I cannot see that they have a leg to stand on, as they have not supplied you with further details, which you would have considered and assessed if they had been supplied in a proper and timely fashion.

If she thinks she should be getting IS, then she should appeal to the DWP.

I would let them sue and be damned!! 😉 8)

[Kevin D]

I think Jon has just about got there. The partner issue is not relevant to the HB decision.

The HB decision was based on the end of IS entitlement (for whatever reason) in conjunction with the failure of the clmt to provide info requested (presumably) under the DARs. So long as the LA has administered the claim correctly, the issue of the partner doesn’t play any part in the decision relating to HB.

I’d have no hesitation in referring this to TAS sticking to the following facts:

1) HB/CTB suspended on the grounds of a doubt as to entitlement, following DWP notice of IS end.

2) Clmt failed to provide info (about ANYTHING).

3) HB/CTB terminated under DARs.

I agree with Jon that the partner issue is for the DWP -but be prepared for the Tribunal to consider underlying entitlement. If the Tribunal refer to underlying entitlement, ask them to DIRECT that the clmt MUST provide prf of ALL income / cap / household details etc.

Regards

[Author]

Posts