Terms & Conditions

[Anselmo]

Hello,

I’m curious about something. I seem to recall some discussion following an apparent trend amongst some councils to totally scrap payment by cheque and pay all claimants by BACS, without exception.

There seemed to be a suggestion from some that this was possibly at best bad customer service and at worst unlawful, as Reg 91 requires us to determine a method of payment having consideration to the needs and convience of the person entitled, i.e. this is a decision that needs to be made on each individual claim.

It’s difficult to see, the argument goes, how we can claim to fulfill the requirements of that regulation to have consideration to their needs and convenience when choosing a method of payment if there is actually only one method of payment we will consider using.

I’d be interested to know if anyone has any experience of, or heard about anyone challenging a decision to refuse to pay by anything other than BACS on this basis, successfully or otherwise.

I’d be slightly surprised if this had never gone to tribunal, anywhere. Anybody? Just curious.

Thanks

[Kevin D]

[quote:5cfbb87a65]I’d be slightly surprised if this had never gone to tribunal, anywhere[/quote:5cfbb87a65]

Matters under Reg 91 are non-appealable per DAR 16 & para 1 of the DAR schedule. The only legally enforceable recourse would be JR (or, possibly, UT now?).

[Anselmo]

Ah, well that clears that up then!!!! 😳

Would still be interested to hear of any experiences though.

[Anonymous]

Wasn’t there a Cmmr’s decision about an IS claimant who didn’t like the DWP’s decision to stop order books and insist on payment by BACS?

If memory serves the claimant lost.

[shadeycat]

We have been paying by BACS only for years and we have no appeals against our payment method.

We have a Money Advice section who will deal with anyone who does not have or cannot open a bank account.

We also have an agreement with the councils bank to let customers open acc’s for the sole purpose of HB payments.

[Author]

Posts