DWP claim against estate

Pollycat

Mojisola wrote: »

If the house was the claimant's home, then its value is disregarded.

If she was living somewhere else, such as a care home or with relatives, and still owned the house it would count as capital.

It would be very naive to just pay out that sort of money without asking for a precise breakdown of how the figure was arrived at. The DWP is made up of people - and people make mistakes.

I do appreciate that, Mojisola.

In the absence of anything to the contrary from the OP, I was assuming that the Grandmother was living in the house whilst claiming benefits rather than being in a care home or living somewhere else.

It would be helpful if the OP would come back and clarify a few points.

I hope you are well.

sleepless_saver

I see the OP also has another identical thread. Looking at that, it strikes me that £115k is exactly the amount of the estate that would be liable for inheritance tax in this case. Her relative had a house worth £440k and very little cash and the inheritance tax threshhold is £325k.

OP, perhaps you could check with your uncle (the executor) whether this is a tax demand or a benefit overpayment we're talking about. The two things are quite different.

Cpt.Scarlet

missapril75 wrote: »

Look at the reason for the overpayment. This is not a change of circumstances it's the existence of capital of nearly half a million ££ that ruled out entitled from the very beginning.

According to the information given it's for a 20 year period.

Perhaps you ought to read my post again and look at the likely levels of Income Support/Pension Credits in payment.

You might also see my comment about challenge it if there's a reason to think it's wrong.

Other than that chip on your shoulder do you have a reason to think it's wrong?

It's not an issue of assuming it's wrong, it's your automatic assumption that it's correct that's the problem and your sanctimonious dismissing of the requirement by the executor to validate what the DWP are saying, as "annoying", that I have a problem with.

missapril75

Russe11 wrote: »

the above poster, do you not know the difference between a home and liquid assetts....

Yes I do. The value of a home is disregarded for benefit purposes.

The DWP will know where the person was living at the time of the claim.

When information comes back to DWP to suggest the potential of higher than previously known capital, they investigate.

Usually the reason is the value of the person's home and no further action is necessary.

So when the information comes back they're going to disregard it if it was the person's home.

If it wasn't the home and there was no reason to disregard it, then they are going to treat it as an asset that would have affected entitlement and raise an overpayment.

as for saying its 1/2million, thats just silly as its over a period of 20years, so when the claim was started the assett would be worth less than the amount they are trying to recover.

So back calculate the value of a £440k home, 20 years. I can't swear to it but I think the capital ceiling back then was £6k or £8k.

I'm fairly sure the property value would have exceeded that.

missapril75

Pollycat wrote: »

I can't see anywhere in the OP's post where it says what the reason given by DWP is for the overpayment.
Have I missed something?

The OP assumed it was because of the house so it seemed reasonable to follow that assumption.

Are you saying that owning a house worth £440K means you are not entitled to benefits such as Pension Credit or Income Support?

No. But as others have said that is if it is one's home. If it's not one's home and there is no other reason for it to be disregarded, then it's an asset that would affect entitlement.

The Pension Credit claim form certainly doesn't ask if you own a house and how much it is worth, it's about income and savings.

Part 4 of the application form.

If I were the OP, I'd definitely be asking for a full and detailed explanation of what the overpayment was for - unless of course she already has that information and hasn't shared it with us.

DWP makes a very formal decision about whether an overpayment has occurred, the reason for it and whether it is recoverable.

A letter is issued referring to the amount, the period and the reason. A more full explanation is offered.

Cpt.Scarlet wrote: »

It's not an issue of assuming it's wrong, it's your automatic assumption that it's correct that's

No...it's more that the DWP has information about this case that you don't.

your sanctimonious dismissing of the requirement by the executor to validate what the DWP are saying, as "annoying", that I have a problem with.

Then perhaps you should have another read of my post. I said

I'm always a little annoyed when the automatic response to a disappointing decision is that someone must appeal or must demand this and that.

I'm clearly not saying I'm annoyed at the suggestion the executor should validate it. I was obviously speaking generally - the reference to "appeal" which is not an issue in this case should indicate my comment was not speaking to this case.

I also said

Challenge it by all means if one has reason to think it wrong in some way.

Tonibee

There's nothing I can usefully add, except the benefit of my experience. Which is that the DWP and local councils will often seek recovery of overpaid benefit where there is no right for them to do so. I.E, they try it on.

It is ALWAYS worth seeking more detailed information and in a letter I would include the following questions:
- why was the benefit not payable
- what is the cause of the overpayment
- what material fact/s is it that the the deceased or his/her appointee has been alleged to have failed to disclose or misrepresented (the key to recovery of overpayments).

Pollycat

It would be very helpful if the OP would come back and clarify some points and answer the many questions that have been asked.

The OP seemed pretty clear that the DWP said the overpayment was in respect of Pension Credit and Income Support but another poster has mentioned Inheritance Tax.
Wouldn't a demand for IT come from HMRC rather than DWP?

The OP said this on another thread:

chili199 wrote: »

I think my uncle (the executor) is trying to scam the family...

My reply:

Pollycat wrote: »

I'm a bit confused how a letter from the DWP (assuming it's a genuine letter and not a forgery) saying that your Grandma was overpaid various benefits could mean that your uncle is trying to scam you.

As the uncle is executor, maybe the OP hsn't seen the original letter allegedly sent from DWP.

I think that more information is needed.

missapril75

Tonibee wrote: »

It is ALWAYS worth seeking more detailed information and in a letter I would include the following questions:
- why was the benefit not payable
- what is the cause of the overpayment
- what material fact/s is it that the the deceased or his/her appointee has been alleged to have failed to disclose or misrepresented (the key to recovery of overpayments).

All three points would be in the original letter about the overpayment. And more detailed information is offered if wanted.

People need to remember that when it's got this far, in most cases the recipients of such letters will know about the resource or increase in resource causing the overpayment that the letter refers to. I'm not saying that they did anything deliberate or misleading but in most cases it's not as mystifying as some might think.

Again, challenge it by all means if one has reason to. The DWP does not simply say Dear Sir, you owe us £200 please repay it.

missapril75

Pollycat wrote: »

The OP seemed pretty clear that the DWP said the overpayment was in respect of Pension Credit and Income Support but another poster has mentioned Inheritance Tax.
Wouldn't a demand for IT come from HMRC rather than DWP?



As the uncle is executor, maybe the OP hsn't seen the original letter allegedly sent from DWP.

Fair points.

IWhobbit

If it's any help, I have had the same problem with the DWP trying to grab a chunk of my late mother's estate. She died in 2013 and as her only child I am both the executor and beneficiary of her estate. Neither my late mother or I am innumerate (I'm a design engineer). They demanded bank statements going back to 2003, which as most of you would know would not be available, as bank statements only go back 6 years. It seems that all they wanted to find out was how much money she had. I wrote back and required all the Pension Credit and Savings Credit payments she received so that I could check for myself if she was overpaid or not. I also pointed out that her financial situation should have been reviewed 5 or 6 years later (in 2009) and the estate should not be made liable for any over payments prior to that.
This has taken a considerable amount of time and effort to get to know the Pension and Savings credit rules, especially over a long time. Mother was severely disabled and housebound for the last six years of her life, which would have actually entitled her to more Pension Credit, which it looks like she did not receive.I find this sort of action by the DWP to be downright immoral, as well as causing immense extra stress to elderly people who may not be maths experts, as well as finding it a deeply sinister means of gouging money from soft targets. It seems that they are trying to make executors and beneficiaries pay for their negligence and mistakes. I have already made strong representations to my local MP in order to prevent this sort of thing happening to others.
As for me, I am defenately not a soft target!