Terms & Conditions

[Anonymous]

xxxxxxxxx

[Anonymous]

You only get 100% subsidy on backdating where the clt has shown good cause so you need to be able to prove to the auditor that good cause was found. Whether they fill in a formal sheet or just put a note on the claim somewhere, there should be a clear record showing the reasons put forward by the clt and why they were/were not accepted. You won’t find this in the HB Regulations but it is part of good governance and financial controls. I expect the auditor will have some guidance notes to show what he is looking for so you could copy those (or are they on the notes accompanying the subsidy claim form – I haven’t checked) but at the end of the day they are assessors who do what they are asked to do. Refused? I think you have a bigger problem here!

[Simo]

Our officers complete proformas for exactly the reason you gave. If this process was followed then our auditor is not fussy with the actual decision as he acknowledged it was often a matter of opinion, what he wanted was ‘that a new officer could not award a backdate without it being approved/checked’.

The second reason why we introduced the proforma was to get the officers to record information about the decision
– on what document is the request
– is there any supporting evidence eg letters from doctor
– what was their thought process on deciding to award it.

Having all this info together helps greatly when the audit is done as saves time looking for documents that may or may not exist.

[Anonymous]

xxxxxxx

[peterdelamothe]

“on the basis that as we get 100% subsidy on backdating”

This perhaps highlights why auditors need to check backdating i.e. to stop Authorities making decisions based on subsidy rather than the law. I am aware of one LA where the auditor has recently refused to agree to the full backdating subsidy; the LA allows backdating for working age automatically on the basis that “it is not worth refusing and wasting time on appeals because the DWP pay for it anyway”.

[Author]

Posts