Terms & Conditions

[petedavies]

I know Comms have considered whether the failure to ask a question on an application form can be an official error but am having a mental block.

Cany anyone point me in the right direction?

[Kevin D]

These?

CH/2098/2005
CH/4075/2003
CH/0881/2005

Regards

[petedavies]

Kevin,

Thanks but no…I’m pretty certain the one I’m thinking about related to the old R(7)(1) but not sure which part!

Assuming I’m not imagining it (starting to doubt myself here), the decision went something along the lines of there being too many variables in the Regs for the L.A. to ask a question to cover every possible scenario.

[Anonymous]

Hi Pete,

Are you thinking of Fairbank v Lambeth Magistrates Court?

[quote:3b20f95d68]The connection between the Regulations and the form is tenuous. The Regulations do not prescribe the contents of the form, only the body by which it must be approved, and that body can also accept a written application for benefits in any other form it regards as sufficient. It could, for example, accept a letter from a member of an ethnic minority written in his mother tongue.[/quote:3b20f95d68]

The case concerned whether the claimant knowingly made a false statement that he did not own a second property. His lawyer submitted that the LA should have defined the meaning of the word ‘own’ for the purpose of the HB regs in the application form – the judge rejected that submission with the above observation.

[petedavies]

Charlie,

Thanks but no, that isn’t it either.

Its coming back slowly! I think it was Reg.7(1)(d)!

[Kevin D]

Um, this?

CH/3679/2002

[petedavies]

OUCH!!!

Thanks, it is not the one I was thinking about (or even one I was aware of) but is highly relevant.

Going for a smoke now before I add it to my sub!

Addendum: Having restored the proper nicotene/blood balance I am beginning to wonder if my memory was playing tricks – it does seem to share quite a bit in common with what I thought I remembered.

[Author]

Posts