DWP claiming repayment of benefit paid in 2007

MikeFloutier

Hi,

My Mum was diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease in 2002 and it became clear she would need full time care pretty soon (leaving the gas on etc).

My wife agreed to give up her full time job to be her carer and we bought a house with flexible accommodation and all moved in in March 2003.

As time went on the caring became 24/7 and we started taking respite breaks with Mum going into temporary respite accommodation provided by the LA/NHS.

Around this time we realised that my wife could claim Invalid Care Allowance (around £45pw) which we did. This accommodated the respite breaks (within reason).

In 2007 my wife developed a back condition that got so bad that she finally required back surgery/rehabilitation. During this period (just under 2 months) Mum naturally went for a respite break.

I can remember at the time that the DWP wrote telling us that they wouldn't pay the Invalid Care Allowance during this period and I can recall writing to them explaining the circumstances and asking for their forbearance bearing in mind that most of our costs relating to my Mum's care would continue and obviously my wife would not be working.

Following on from that they did actually continue paying the ICA payments. Naturally we appreciated this but didn't think too much about it because, as you can imagine, caring for someone in the latter stages of Dementia and recovering from back surgery tends to focus the mind somewhat.

My Mum finally died at home on 10 December 2009. We wrote informing the DWP who wrote back advising us that the ICA payments would now stop; which they did.

Obviously we dealt with the funeral and wound up my Mum's estate, and, in the fullness of time, we moved house to somewhere more suitable.

After moving, in June 2012, I disposed of all my Mum's old paperwork, everything having been settled up.

It was a surprise therefore when I recently received an unsigned letter from the DWP Debt Management Centre telling us that we owed £437.85 and that if we didn't sort it out immediately they were going to send in the debt collectors without further ado.

I wrote to them asking what it was all about and why they were now contacting us after nearly 7 years.

They replied saying that they wanted to claw back the benefit paid during my wife's back surgery/rehabilitation respite period and that this was the "debt" that they had referred to. They offered no explanation for the 7 year delay.

To be frank, having looked at their rules, and, having reconstructed the 7 year old circumstances as best I can, it certainly appears legal, if not equitable, that they could have refused to pay the benefit in 2007.

Having said that, to be trying to claw it back now seems a bit rich.

What do folks thing?

pmlindyloo

The rules for Carer's Allowance are complicated.

Here is a summary

http://www.nhs.uk/CarersDirect/moneyandlegal/carersbenefits/Pages/CA-claims-and-changes.aspx



Click on the link at the bottom - Carer's Allowance & hospital or care home stays.

You will need to know all the dates involved in this. Your wife's hospital stays/respite care etc.

Have they given you the dates when you are being asked for the overpayment?

Also do you have a copy of the letter you sent informing them of the change of circumstances?

You need to ask for a detailed breakdown of payments from them and try to work out whether they are correct. CAb may assist if you have all the paperwork & bank statements showing payments of the CA.

MikeFloutier

Many thanks pmlindyloo,

I have everything you mention and I can confirm that their request was bonafide at the time they made it - nearly 7 years ago.

What immediately followed was my request for their understanding of our circumstances AND the fact that they: 1. Paid the ICA, and, 2. didn't claw it back at the time; which they could quite easily have done; either by reducing the future ICA payments, or, failing that by rejecting our plea and demanding repayment.

To ask for it back NOW, nearly 7 years later, without any explanation (for the intervening delay) seems ludicrous.

Horseunderwater

Standard practice for DWP these days - lots of people are in similar situations ATM.

pmlindyloo

This debt is, in fact, statute barred because it is over 6 years old - ie they cannot go to court about it.

The problem is that they have other powers of claiming it back through future benefits (including state pension I believe).

So, I was suggesting that the amount they are claiming is checked thoroughly according to the link I gave you. There are, as you will see, periods of when CA can continue to be paid so you need to work out what periods are relevant to this.

MikeFloutier

Thanks pmlindyloo,

That's actually really helpful, since my SPA is still around 6 years away I may just follow their example and reply to their letter in 2020.

MikeFloutier

Actually, just one more question.

They have threatened debt collectors. Does this imply that they've already obtained Judgement on the debt? They could have used my old address and I'd never have received it.

pmlindyloo

MikeFloutier wrote: »

Actually, just one more question.

They have threatened debt collectors. Does this imply that they've already obtained Judgement on the debt? They could have used my old address and I'd never have received it.

No, it doesn't mean they have obtained judgement on you.

Debt collectors are often used (or the debt sold on to them) as a means of recovery. Debt collectors have no legal powers and are not bailiffs. (although they can be quite intimidating)

If you are concerned about whether court action has happened then you need to check your credit rating (by writing to the credit reference agency. The debt will not be statute barred if they have obtained a CCJ but from what you say I doubt that this has happened.

To be honest I would get some advice about this. Try CAB if you live near one with specialist help.

If you think you have a case for not owing the money then you have a time limit for appealing so you need to get some advice.

Shelldean

I didn't think DWP debts ever became barred or am I thinking incorrectly?

MikeFloutier

Many thanks blondebubbles,

Looking more closely at the timings, it appears that the Debt may not actually be more than 6 years old.

Obviously the tail end of the 6 year period would be when I received their letter dated 28th March 2014 demanding payment.

It's the start of the 6 year period that I'm not sure of; i.e.. when did the debt actually begin?

We had ongoing ICA payments whilst caring for my Mum. Each time we took a respite break we would advise them after the event.

Usually this wouldn't affect the payments BUT on this occasion (due to my wife's back surgery) the respite period caused some disallowance under the DWP rules.

We wrote advising them of the extended respite break on 22nd Jan 2008. They then wrote to us on 19th May 2008 advising us that they were disallowing £437.85 regarding my wife's surgery/rehab period. We then replied on 5th June 2008 explaining the circumstances fully and asking them to reconsider.

They did not reply to this letter AND continued to pay the ICA until my Mum's death on 10th Dec 2009.

I suppose that IF indeed a Debt can be judged to exist then it would have, as it's inception, the date of 19th May 2008 and the date of last communication regarding it would be my letter to them dated 5th June 2008.

It would seem that there can be no relevant 6 year period to rely upon.

Finally, this really leaves the point that my request (on 5th June 2008) for allowance of the dis-allowed payments was not responded to until 28th March 2014 AND, in the meantime, ICA payments continued (they could have been set off). Surely this makes it clear that they did not consider that a debt existed AND that this current action is a cynical attempt to bolster their income.

We now have a letter from their Debt Collectors saying that, if we do not respond, they will apply for Judgement etc. At least this answers the question of whether or not they already have a Judgement.

I now have to make a decision as to whether I contest the situation and risk having to pay costs and legal fees OR I just pay up.

What do you think?

pmlindyloo

If you are sure that you owe this amount of money taking into account all the 'run ons' periods set out in the link I gave you then, personally, I would pay up.

However, I am not you (obviously!) and do not know the full circumstances.

If you have evidence that you contacted them to advise them of the change of circumstances and they did not act on this then you mayhave a case for appeal.

However, it could be argued that the fact that you continued to get the payments when you weren't entitled and didn't chase them about this may go against you.

Not knowing the 'rules' is not sufficient defence.

You say you think you owe the money in your first post. Have you worked out whether you do using the 'run ons' that you may have been entitled to? Have you asked someone (CAB?) to check that this overpayment is correct? Have you asked for a detailed breakdown of the debt?

If you have done all these things and you do owe them the money then pay up (or ask for a repayment plan)

The fact that this has taken so long is, I'm sorry to say, no defence either.

Appeals are based on facts and evidence. You would have to prove that they have made a mistake in their calculation.