Terms & Conditions

[Accura]

When a new claim is received, customer fails to provide information and claim is “closed down” what wording on the notification letters are other LAs using in this instance.

As technically the claim isn’t cancelled as there was no entitlement.

[jmembery]

We say “I have decided that your claim is defective and you are therefore not entitled to Housing Benefit”

[Kevin D]

Some LAs choose to take the extra step and draw inferences. A couple of examples (paraphrased & consolidated):

—————————
[b:1c18ba1fa1]Further to my letters of [date] & [date], I note that I have not received the information and evidence needed to assess your benefit entitlement. In the circumstances, I have made assumptions about your circumstances and have decided you do not qualify for HB/CTB on the basis that one, or more, of the following applies:

1) you have too much capital to qualify
2) your income is too high to qualify
3) you have no rent liability [PTs only!]

Appeal rights……etc……[/b:1c18ba1fa1]
—————————–

There is no reason why the above can’t be adapted to take into account non-dep circs. And, it could also be jigged around a bit for DAR 11/13/14 cases.

Regards

[Accura]

thanks for those

I have read and re-read Sheldons CIPFA notes from Oct 2005, detailing the commissioners, LA & DWP findings although it seems there are still differences between LAs in how the letters are worded.

I want to reduce the stated time limits on the further info request letters to 7 days then send a reminder to increase turn round times (although the LA wouldn’t actually close the claim down until the month expires)

But when the decision is made (adverse inference / defective / add any other options you may feel appply 😕 ) – we need to be spot on with the wording

thanks

Paul 😀

[Author]

Posts