Extended payment – entitled or not?

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #31852
    j parkin
    Participant

    I’ve been trying to work out if a claimant is entitled to Extended Payment.

    The problem I have been trying to get into my head is that the customer had no previous entitlement to HB/CTB and the principle of EP always seemed to me that this was an extension of payments already being made.

    Scenario is:

    Customer moves into a house 26.7.2010 with liability to pay rent, prior to this was homeless.

    At this point he is on ESA but on 2.8.2010 he starts employment. On the same day he makes a claim for HB/CTB for the previous week. He also indicates that he wants us to pay an extended payment as he qualifies for this.

    The claim does not get assessed as he fails to provide evidence requested, and in any case would have been assessed from 9.8.2010 as Monday after date of claim as an ‘in work’ claim.

    I have looked at Reg 72, the Welfare Reform Act 2007 (32, 33,34) and Contributions and Benefits Act (s130), and it seems to me that all these only indicate that he has to be entitled to a prescribed benefit and have potential entitlement to HB/CTB to get the EP paid rather than a HB/CTB claim in payment.

    Anyone any opinion on this?

    #89072
    dayglow
    Participant

    My understanding was that an EP was awarded for the 4 weeks following the start of work/increase in hours at the amount awarded in the last full benefit week before the EP commenced.

    Therefore, if there was no entitlement before (as no claim) then there is no EP, as there was not any entitlement in the last full benefit week before the EP commenced.

    #89073
    Anonymous
    Guest

    I take it he was on income-based ESA?

    If so, he claimed within a month of becoming liable, so HB/CTB claim date is 26/7/10 and the award starts on the same date. (Only problem with this is how you read reg 83(5)(b) – the important part seems to be that he becomes liable while still receiving IS/JSA/ESA, but you could argue that as he was not receiving ESA on the date of the claim he cannot take advantage of the rule)

    He started work on 02/08/10, effective 09/08/10.

    So he would have two week’s passported HB/CTB from 26/07/10 – 08/08/10.

    I’m assuming the information you requested related to his employment? If so that is no reason to disallow the passported period.

    The EP could run from 09/08/10 assuming other conditions were satisfied.

    Alternatively, if you decide 83(5)(b) does not apply, you can backdate to 26/07/10. Good cause for 7 days should not be hard to demonstrate since he has moved home and started a new job within that time.

    #89074
    Anonymous
    Guest

    Actually he only needs to show 1 day’s good cause, since that would move his claim date to 01/08/10 which was within the first week of liability! 8)

    #89075
    j parkin
    Participant

    Thanks for the replies.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.