Terms & Conditions

[lesleyb]

I’m looking at an appeal where IS has stopped as the claimant was found to be living with her partner who is employed – HB/CTB overpayments calculated.

However, her case was referred for prosecution and last week she admitted the charge and is awaiting sentence. Due to the evidence available I will be upholding our decision and submitting papers to the tribunals service, but can I mention in the papers that she has admitted the fraud in court?

thanks

[nolan1]

You could if you need to.

Is the appeal against the overpayments? or the living together decision? or both?

[lesleyb]

She has appealed the overpayments stating she did not at anytime knowingly or deliberately withhold material facts relating to her claim. Which seems a bit strange since she has admitted to the offence in court!

[nolan1]

Dont see why not then.

[lesleyb]

Thanks

[Kevin D]

[quote:c97044aa86=”lesleyb”]I’m looking at an appeal where IS has stopped as the claimant was found to be living with her partner who is employed – HB/CTB overpayments calculated.[/quote:c97044aa86]
It’s unclear whether consideration has been given to whether the claimant was entitled to HB/CTB even with her partner. Bear in mind that LT and the cessation of IS are not grounds, in themselves, for ending HB/CTB.

[quote:c97044aa86=”lesleyb”]…can I mention in the papers that she has admitted the fraud in court?[/quote:c97044aa86]
Yes. But if the LA has made administration errors (e.g. terminating under DAR 14 without properly following DAR 13; failing to notify the clmt etc), it is still conceivable for the FtT to find for the claimant on a technicality. It would be wise to make sure all bases are covered.

Also, a FtT is not necessarily bound by the findings of a Criminal Court. In this case, given the admission(s) by the clmt, this distinction is unlikely to be of concern – at least in terms of the substantive LT issue. But, I wouldn’t take anything for granted.

One last point: if there are any papers in the prosecution bundle that are relevant to the “civil” appeal, those papers should be openly included in the evidence bundle.

[lesleyb]

HB/CTB including the partner’s income has already been considered and she doesn’t qualify – all the relevant regs have been followed and I have the evidence the DWP used in their decision – I only wanted to know whether or not I was allowed to mention the court case in my submission.

thanks for your info.

[Anonymous]

It’s on the record so no problem at all, plus it is relevant to your decision. What the DWP have advised against in the past is making reference to a fraud investigation in the papers which is just thrown in for effect and adds nothing to the decison making. I have used records of an IUC in my submissions, [i:72d5560a1c]where it is relevant[/i:72d5560a1c]

[lesleyb]

Thanks for the additional info.

[Author]

Posts