Terms & Conditions

[Accura]

scenario: customer supplies 2 wageslips but LA requests 5, customer has only just started work so we pay the customer based on 2 wageslips and request another 3. The remaining wageslips are received, what date does the LA action the change from.

My view is that the LA should make a decision based on the circumstances however a response from Adelphi suggests that the LA should always go from the Monday following the “initial” award period or Monday following the receipt of the info requested so as not to disadvantage the customer and thus the question of revision would never arise.

I strongly disagree with their interpretation and am looking for some “back up”

thanks

[seanosul]

If you made an “interim award” then you have made a payment on account (there is no such thing as an interim award). You therefore need to make a full decision on the claim from the start of the entitlement based on the evidence you have to hand.

[Accura]

I agree with that, but if you make an award based on a contract of employment and then later receive the first month’s wageslip which is vastly different would you revise from the original start date?

[seanosul]

As I said this would depend on whether you made an “interim award” or a full decision. I would have sought better information than the first payslip (contract of employment and calculate tax??)

Are you suggesting the beneficial change rule applies?

[Kevin D]

[quote:7466a0846f]I agree with that, but if you make an award based on a contract of employment and then later receive the first month’s wageslip which is vastly different would you revise from the original start date?[/quote:7466a0846f]

Based on that set of circs, without a shadow of doubt. As has been stated in other threads, income is attributable to the period it is in respect of. In this case, the facts *appear* to be clear cut and there is no (apparent) room for ambiguity.

Regards

[Accura]

this is an actual reponse from Adelphi;

I have been asked to reply. Having discussed with various colleagues in HB and decision making policy, our view is as follows.
Whether the claimant is working when he first claims or starts work whilst claiming, where the decision maker does not have a final earnings figure he should estimate the average weekly earnings using reg 22(3). If this done where an award is in place, then he would supersede for a change of circs under normal rules. At the same time the claimant would be asked to supply verification of actual earnings. When this is received the decision maker would re-calculate the earnings and (assuming the earnings changed) do another supersession. This would be a supersession for change of circumstances under reg 7(2)(a). What about the effective date? This would be determined by the start date of the period immediately following that used to calculate the initial average. For example: claim made/work started 1.4.05; earnings averaged for the period 1.4.05 to 1.6.05; wage slips requested with a view to reconsidering the position from 2.6.05. If information received within one month of the date, the effective date would be 2.6.05. If received outside one month, change advantageous but no special circumstance, effective date would be the date of receipt. If benefit reduces effective date would be 2.6.05 regardless of when told. You will realise from this that the question of revision does not arise.

[seanosul]

You have said vastly different – how vastly different? I am not sure whether it would really affect my reply but I would like to know.

The reply does not appear to be based on the question you asked here. You asked about interim awards. These are payments on account and you will not have decided the cliam until you have all of the information necessary to pay the claim. In which case you will use the correct details from the start of the claim. Advantageous or disadvantageous.

[Accura]

thanks Sean

our problem is that we’re pressured to make a decision, we try and avoid payment on accounts or “interim” awards as I know many other LAs do. But we have been advised by the checking team that we can’t go back and amend the award if we have made a decision on 1 payslip or an employers letter for example and its a normal decision i.e. not an “interim” award. Regardless of the difference in the amount of income / capital that is subsequently provided as evidence.

I hope this makes sense as I may be confusing myself as much as I have confused others!

[gerryg]

Assuming you have made a proper decision to pay based on an estimate of earnings from a contract or employer’s letter then you still have DAR 4(2)(b) to fall back on and can revise your decision based on “ignorance of, or mistake as to, a material fact” if you underestimated the earnings.

If you have overestimated the earnings your claimant can still request a revision. If it’s more than a month your claimant has “special circs” for not requesting the revision earlier as they could not provide something they did not have.

That lot satisfies the requirement to take the income into account for the period to which it relates and should placate your checking team. I think the DWP answer is very messy and not very useful.

[Accura]

thanks Gerry

that’s music to my ears! 😆

[Author]

Posts