Partner refused a NINO – Appeal Made

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #38231
    Anonymous
    Guest

    Someone claimed in Feb 2011 but the claim was refused, because the partner was refused a NINO. They appealed the decision regarding the NINO and they have now granted the partner one.

    Therefore we can now pay the claim.

    Question is do we pay the claim from Feb 2011 or from May 2011 when the NINO was awarded?

    #107708
    Anonymous
    Guest

    It depends why the NINO was refused.

    You should think of this as a variation on a defective claim – the partner is required to cooperate with the NINO process by attending interviews and submitting evidence. Any failure to do that without a good reason would lead you to conclude that the claimant had not done enough to satisfy s1 of the Administration Act.

    But if the application was refused for some other reason, it might be appropriate to revise. Do you know why it was?

    #107713
    Anonymous
    Guest

    The DCI1 form confirms the NINO was refused for the following reason ‘ EOI Uncorrobarated’
    I take that to mean that she didn’t provide sufficient evidence of her immigration status or she didn’t have immigration status at that time am i right?

    The partner is Chinese by the way. She has been given leave to remain from 16/05/11. The more i think about it now the more it makes sense. I’m now starting to think we wouldn’t be able to pay it prior to the NINO being given. Even though the leave to remain doesn’t make a difference as she is the partner, it obviously makes a difference when it came to issuing a NINO to her.

    Do you agree that we wouldn’t be able to revise the decision and can only pay HB from May when the NINO was allocated to her.

    #107719
    Anonymous
    Guest

    I’m guessing EOI stands for “evidence of identity” – what she provided wasn’t strong enough. Next question is why? Passport with Home Office maybe? That sounds likely, in which case she has perhaps cooperated as best she can and has produced proof of ID as soon as she had it back from the Home ofice. I would revise the decision if that was the case.

    Also, if she did not already have leave to begin with (i.e. from 16/5/11 is her first leave rather than variation/extension of the original) she wouldn’t even need a NINO until 16/5/11 – she would be exempt under HB Reg 4.

    #107731
    Anonymous
    Guest

    I’m going to revise the decision in that case then and pay it back to Feb 2011!!

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