ESA to UC query/ potential PIP backpayment maybe causing deductions.

Alice_Holt

This is taken from from DRH -
"Arrears over £5k made to compensate for an official error or an error in law, can be disregarded until the end of your award of means-tested benefit. This also applies if you received such a payment while on legacy benefits, and are then migrated onto UC within one month of the legacy benefit ending." (It also applies when moving from IBESA /UC onto PC). 

Robbie64

Spoonie_Turtle said:

poppy12345 said:

Spoonie_Turtle said:

poppy12345 said:

Spoonie_Turtle said:

Further to poppy's comment, if PIP backpay is over £5,000 then it's disregarded indefinitely.  (That may not be relevant to you though, depending on how long your claim has taken.)

That wouldn't apply in this case. A disaregard for the life of the claim only applies to offical errors, so for example the error of those that transferred from IB to ESA and didn't have the Income Related top up, when they should have.

Thank you for the correction, I must have totally misunderstood.  I don't want to derail the thread, sorry, but do want to understand this.  Is that what this part means re: payments of over £5,000?

3. the period of entitlement to benefit or AFIP to which the payment of arrears or compensation relates, begins before the first day on which the abolition of existing benefits comes into force

(para H2092  https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1085956/admh2.pdf) 

That link doesn't work for me.

Oh so it doesn't, sorry - how odd, it was straight from the website.

The bracket at the end of what you posted has become part of the link which is why it doesn't work.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1085956/admh2.pdf

Ihatethinkingofusernames11

Hello thanks to everybody who replied again

Yes sorry I didn't think it necessary to put I lived with mum and brother again so would not qualify for SDP and thanks for the recommendation nannytone_2.

Should I try to list my entire circumstances in posts? I don't know if some are already familiar with some circumstances and worry that too much text will be a pain to read. I always try to edit and make it shorter if possible but sometimes struggle to be concise.

So if I read correctly you were saying that there is no rule where 5000+ does not need to be paid back?

I ask this as an example was provided

Poppy12345 said:

"That wouldn't apply in this case. A disaregard for the life of the claim only applies to offical errors, so for example the error of those that transferred from IB to ESA and didn't have the Income Related top up, when they should have."

I'm wondering if this actually applies to me now as a large amount of what I have saved currently is the result of a backpayment in similar circumstances.
I used to claim IB then they moved me to contribution based ESA and then I had backpayment when I moved to income related ESA. 

The amount was less than 5000 about 4-5 years ago(I think).
I think the backpayment was because they should have added the top up or I should have been switched to income related straight away.

I don't know whether I can still prove it as I've had a few bank accounts (I still have 3 accounts) and I did move money between accounts as advised by some articles on this website in order to claim interest if there was a minimum monthly pay in limit.
I have tried to keep a large amount of that payment aside for a rainy day.
Maybe there is one account that has been the most stable with 33% of the money in.

Although in one of my accounts with 66% of the backpayment I did sometimes pay for things online and then topped it up with my normal/ most used current account as the interface was easier and had more regular payees saved. I did recently switch this account though to another for cashback.

Thanks for the replies again hopefully I have understood correctly but I don't know if I can argue that it is all backpayment money as I have paid for things and then topped it back up every so often from my main account, and moved money between them.

poppy12345

Ihatethinkingofusernames11 said:

So if I read correctly you were saying that there is no rule where 5000+ does not need to be paid back?

That's not what i said. Why would  £5,000 need to be repaid back? The £5,000 that was mentioned only applies to backdated money from an official error, which doesn't apply to you.

What i advised was that any money owed from a successful PIP claim would be disregarded for 1 year even when you claim UC. It would not be disregarded for any longer than this. You don't need to declare this when claiming UC.

Spoonie_Turtle

Ihatethinkingofusernames11 said:

So if I read correctly you were saying that there is no rule where 5000+ does not need to be paid back?

The £5,000 figure is completely irrelevant to your situation, I had misunderstood the information so please try to disregard it - I'm very sorry for muddying the waters.

Ihatethinkingofusernames11

Hello Poppy12345 I apologise I have made an error writing that and didn't mean to.
How on earth did I type that!? Honestly smh!

I may have somehow confused 2 posts and maybe transposed back payment/ back paid with paid back instead of saying disregarded indefinitely/ till the end of the claim.

I admit I was confused a bit with the rules of backpayment both over 5000 (and what was being discussed between others).
I wondered if official errors below that amount got the same treatment,I thought may apply to me but it has been further clarified since anyway and would not apply.

I just saw the example of IB to ESA and thought that maybe happened to me.
In any case even if it was an official error, it was below 5k, so would not apply for the life of the claim.

So hopefully can forget about it and didn't mean any disrespect.

I understand any backpayment would be disregarded for 1 year only and not need to be declared to UC.

Thanks to everyone who replied.

Alice_Holt thanks  for the clarification and Spoonie_Turtle also no worries it was me who didn't read it/reply properly