Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • butterflies56
    • By butterflies56 19th Dec 17, 3:10 PM
    • 39Posts
    • 28Thanks
    butterflies56
    DWP errors and cut off date for backdated premiums
    • #1
    • 19th Dec 17, 3:10 PM
    DWP errors and cut off date for backdated premiums 19th Dec 17 at 3:10 PM
    With a great deal of help from Epitome, I filled in an ESA3 form and backdated it to Oct 2012
    As I had been migrated from IB to ESA(cont) and Support Group at that time but did not receive and ESA3 form in 2012.

    I met all the criteria for Enhanced Disability Premium but never received these payments.
    Even though the payments showed up on my Housing and council Tax Benefits letters.

    Anyway, fast forward to this week and I have received a letter from the DWP and payment for backdated EDP to Oct 2014. So 3 out of 5years payments received.

    The DWP quote..."By law we are unable to pay you for any period before October 2014 (Section 27 of the Social Security Act 1998).

    I did some research on this and have found that the DWP are using "Error in Law' to get around not paying people(these are the 75.000 claimants who have been underpaid) the EDP(in my case) and probably SDP in other cases.

    I have never had to appeal anything before with the DWP but I am going to appeal this decision.

    My question is....How do I appeal?
    Do I just write to them and say I am appealing the decision or do I need to fill in a particular form?!
    Thanks in advance for anyone's help!
Page 1
    • butterflies56
    • By butterflies56 19th Dec 17, 3:33 PM
    • 39 Posts
    • 28 Thanks
    butterflies56
    • #2
    • 19th Dec 17, 3:33 PM
    Here's a statement from David Gauke
    • #2
    • 19th Dec 17, 3:33 PM
    The last couple of paragraphs are very interesting...

    Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) was introduced in 2008. In 2011 the Department began reassessing people claiming pre-existing incapacity benefits to see whether they were eligible for ESA. The previous benefits included Incapacity Benefit, Severe Disablement Allowance and Income Support.
    In 2013, the Department was made aware of individual cases which were transferred in error to contributory ESA, rather than to income-related ESA, and therefore which may have had an unidentified entitlement to additional premia, such as the enhanced disability premium. These premia are only payable to those on income-related benefits. From 2014 additional guidance was put in place to ensure all claims transitioning from that point forward were more fully assessed for both contributory and income-related benefits, and therefore the relevant premia paid.
    At the time officials did not identify the need to explore the potential impact of the earlier error. This was reconsidered in the light of analysis following the preliminary Fraud and Error statistics published in May 2016. In February 2017, ministers were first informed of the results of this analysis and a sampling exercise began in preparation for a full repayment process. The Department has already started contacting individuals to establish if there has been an underpayment of premia. A small number of claims have already been corrected and the appropriate arrears have been paid.
    As a result of the sampling exercise, the Department estimates that around 75,000 claimants may have been underpaid. This amounts to about 5% of those people who transferred over from incapacity benefits, or around 3% of the current ESA caseload.
    We realise how important it is to get this matter fixed. The Department has established a special team to begin contacting all individuals whom we believe may be affected. There is therefore no need for individuals to independently contact the department on this matter. Once an individual is contacted and subject to establishing the relevant information, we expect to make a decision on each case and repay the appropriate arrears within 12 weeks. The Department expects to complete the review and correct cases during the course of 2018/19.
    This relates to a specific group that transferred to contributory ESA between 2011 and 2014, for which applicable underpayments will now be corrected and paid. Arrears are payable to those who qualify from 21 October 2014 following an Upper Tier Tribunal ruling in the case of LH v SSWP on that date. Under Section 27 of the Social Security Act 1998, when a tribunal establishes the meaning of a legislative provision, payments of arrears which pre-date the tribunal ruling are barred.
    The Department is reviewing its processes to ensure any lessons are learnt and that this error is avoided in the future.
    • epitome
    • By epitome 19th Dec 17, 9:16 PM
    • 3,160 Posts
    • 1,916 Thanks
    epitome
    • #3
    • 19th Dec 17, 9:16 PM
    • #3
    • 19th Dec 17, 9:16 PM
    I will try to look for the relevant regulation, to refer to, can't promise anything.

    This Social Sec Act 1998 law S27...sounds bizarre. And I would want to know what date the LH v SSWP arrears went back to because surely that could be relevant as well?
    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/14/pdfs/ukpga_19980014_300617_en.pdf


    I would certainly be writing to my MP enclosing a copy of the decision. And asking why the government knows they have acted incorrectly but are refusing to fully correct the error.

    And I would be looking for a free solicitor consultation and looking on social media...for a class action against the DWP or creating your own social media group inviting people to join you in a class action.

    I guess people -and there are some- who got it back paid to 2012 are lucky because the DWP had not set up the task force so decision makers were just awarding what they thought was right. Now the task force is being set up they have sought ways to minimise the departments losses.

    The decision is here
    http://administrativeappeals.decisions.tribunals.gov.uk//Aspx/view.aspx?id=4349

    I have read this one before, it allows ESA IR to be backdated to a date of a supersession. The supersession was that she was placed in the support group 1 year after migration and being in the WRAG. I can't read it now as I don't have office on this computer. but as I remember it ...it does not state how long a claimant has got (after the supersession takes place) to ask for a backdating to the date of the supersession. And hey I'm not legally qualified, and I don't pretend to know more than the DWP's legal section.....but I can't really see the relevance of this tribunal decision to the question of ESA IB Mig arrears on the failure of the DWP to carry out it's duty on IB reassessment.... As far as I am aware this UT tribunal does not even mention the relevant law/regulation that requires DWP to assess for Income Related on migration (this is the law I was referring to on the first line of this post) unless they are saying that IB migration is in itself a supersession (I don't know if that is true or not)

    My thinking is right now that there are 2 ways to look at this....an error has occurred in the DWP that IR was not assessed at IB migration.

    * The DWP is required to assess for IR by regulations (the one I will find for you)
    * The IB Migration is maybe a supersession in itself

    The DWP seem to be saying they will not allow arrears on the second point but totally ignore the first point.

    I would ask for a verbal explanation call and request written statement of reasons as to why the DWP thinks this UT decision relates to IB Migration ESA IR backdating requests.
    Last edited by epitome; 19-12-2017 at 11:28 PM.
    • butterflies56
    • By butterflies56 19th Dec 17, 10:46 PM
    • 39 Posts
    • 28 Thanks
    butterflies56
    • #4
    • 19th Dec 17, 10:46 PM
    • #4
    • 19th Dec 17, 10:46 PM
    Thank you Epitome!
    I totally agree with everything you have said.

    There has been an UT Appeal about this very issue which took place a couple of weeks back but it looks like the result won't be published until early January.

    I would love to be able to get a Class Action going but unfortunately I am too ill and bedridden for long periods of time. I can only manage a very short time on laptop per day but definitely not enough to be on Social Media. I wish my brain would work like it used to!

    Thank you so much for all your help though because it was you who gave me the confidence to make the call to ESA and as a result I did get 3years back dated which has made a huge difference to my finances. I am extremely grateful to you Epitome for making such a difference to mine and other peoples lives.
    • epitome
    • By epitome 19th Dec 17, 11:24 PM
    • 3,160 Posts
    • 1,916 Thanks
    epitome
    • #5
    • 19th Dec 17, 11:24 PM
    • #5
    • 19th Dec 17, 11:24 PM
    Nice to hear, thank you, it beats being accused of fraud by people who don't have a clue.
    • epitome
    • By epitome 19th Dec 17, 11:38 PM
    • 3,160 Posts
    • 1,916 Thanks
    epitome
    • #6
    • 19th Dec 17, 11:38 PM
    • #6
    • 19th Dec 17, 11:38 PM
    Actually thought of something else...

    The act of completing the ESA3 is a request for a supersession of ESA.

    So what DWP are saying is that they will only grant the supersession back to Oct 2014. This is how the OCT 2014 UT decision becomes relevant.

    But it is because of DWP error that you were not invited to do an ESA3 in 2012.

    So I would be asking if you will cannot award ESA back before Oct 2014 are you going to compensate me for my losses that have occurred from your error? for the period 2012 - 2014

    The DWP has a process for claiming compensation..special payments I think they call it. Compensation should be equal to if not more than what they would have paid you.

    If they are correct it does not stop them from paying compensation, in fact it should make it more likely that compensation is owed.
    Last edited by epitome; 19-12-2017 at 11:55 PM.
    • butterflies56
    • By butterflies56 20th Dec 17, 9:59 AM
    • 39 Posts
    • 28 Thanks
    butterflies56
    • #7
    • 20th Dec 17, 9:59 AM
    • #7
    • 20th Dec 17, 9:59 AM
    Actually thought of something else...

    The act of completing the ESA3 is a request for a supersession of ESA.

    So what DWP are saying is that they will only grant the supersession back to Oct 2014. This is how the OCT 2014 UT decision becomes relevant.

    But it is because of DWP error that you were not invited to do an ESA3 in 2012.

    So I would be asking if you will cannot award ESA back before Oct 2014 are you going to compensate me for my losses that have occurred from your error? for the period 2012 - 2014

    The DWP has a process for claiming compensation..special payments I think they call it. Compensation should be equal to if not more than what they would have paid you.

    If they are correct it does not stop them from paying compensation, in fact it should make it more likely that compensation is owed.
    Originally posted by epitome
    Thank you very much for this information and very much appreciated.

    Will look into this and put together a letter to them.

    Thanks again you're an
    • epitome
    • By epitome 21st Dec 17, 11:42 PM
    • 3,160 Posts
    • 1,916 Thanks
    epitome
    • #8
    • 21st Dec 17, 11:42 PM
    • #8
    • 21st Dec 17, 11:42 PM
    I did not answer your original question, "how to appeal"

    You have 1 month to ask for a Mand Recon, but there should be no problem if it is late. by asking for a WSOR entitles you to a 2 week extension on the time you have to submit an MR (the guidance of the 2 week extension is not very clearly worded.) I would not worry about the MR deadline, there is other guidance that says late submissions should be generally accepted.

    First write a letter ask for mandatory reconsideration, stating reasons why decision is wrong or just asking for a second decision with no reasons.

    send or scan letter via jobcentre or phone ESA and request they take your reasons by phone to be typed by operative and sent in handover.
    Best by scan or phone.

    State it has now become "a supersession request" through the DWP error in the first place, had they done the IB migration properly it would never have had to be a supersession...because the ESA would have been awarded from the outset as Income related, as they would have assessed you for income related as part of the process.

    A supersession is a request for a change
    If it had been assessed to begin with before ESA was first awarded there would have been no need for a change, and hence no supersession.

    They are penalising you for their error. Request that the ESA3 be treated as though it had been completed in 2012 not 2017
    Last edited by epitome; 23-12-2017 at 1:20 PM.
    • epitome
    • By epitome 22nd Dec 17, 9:22 AM
    • 3,160 Posts
    • 1,916 Thanks
    epitome
    • #9
    • 22nd Dec 17, 9:22 AM
    • #9
    • 22nd Dec 17, 9:22 AM
    As I said earlier my computer does not have word so I have not had a chance to re-read that UT tribunal, I am working from memory here.

    Before sending a mandatory recon letter, I would ask DWP to explain in a Written Statement Of Reasons (WSOR) precisely what meaning of which legislative provision was established at the UT tribunal and why that becomes relevant now to bar them from paying arrears in your circumstance before the UT date. Unless you have more in your letter that will help explain this?

    They could say they learned any of these, most likely the last one

    A) "Arrears of ESA are payable back to a date of a pre-existing supersession.".... I would argue that in your case there is no date of pre-existing supersession. Your supersession decision date is 15/12/2017 this decision allows your arrears to be payable back to 2012.

    Or

    B) "Completing an ESA3 for ESA(IR) is not 'making a new claim' and hence not time limited to only 3 months of arrears but instead it can be backdated to a date of a pre-existing supersession on an existing claim if that supersession gives reason for it to be advantageous to claim ESAIR."..... But again, you don't have a pre-existing supersession, so I can't see how it is relevant.

    Or

    C) "Completing an ESA3 for ESA(IR) is not 'making a new claim' and hence not time limited to 3 months of arrears but it can be backdated more than this.".... Which is a more general way of looking at the UT decision. Which makes it more relevant to your case.
    I would argue....
    That in the specific UT case, arrears were payable to the date of a pre-existing supersession (that of support group being awarded). You do not have a pre-existing supersession date. So ask them (in your request for a WSOR) on what grounds are they allowing you to backdate to October 2014? Their argument should be "we are allowing backdating due to our error of not assessing you for ESA IR at migration in 2012" which, to me, is a different reason for allowing backdating. If it is a different reason that allows backdating, then arrears should not be barred beyond October 2014.

    and

    That the claimant in the UT was doing the the ESA3 of her own volition, not due to an error in process on the part of the DWP. But you are doing the ESA3 to correct an error in process that dates back to before your ESA start date. So the two scenarios are not identical and should not be compared.

    How did you find out about the new UT case coming in January? Any links?


    You should also note, that the decision maker has already written what they would call a WSOR, you already have it in the form of the letter you got. So although I am suggesting you ask them to clarify these certain points....I don't think they will, they will just send you the same decision letter again. I suggest your best hope of getting the answers to the my questions is to phone them and ask for a call back for a verbal Explanation of the decision...ask the DM these questions and when they have explained themselves to you say toi them "You did not say any of this in your decision letter can you send me another letter clarifying these points."
    Last edited by epitome; 23-12-2017 at 4:53 PM.
    • Alice Holt
    • By Alice Holt 22nd Dec 17, 9:24 AM
    • 2,807 Posts
    • 3,275 Thanks
    Alice Holt
    Here is a template for the MR:
    https://www.leicester.gov.uk/media/178163/mandatory-reconsideration-request.pdf

    Here is some info on the appeals process:
    https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/benefits/sick-or-disabled-people-and-carers/employment-and-support-allowance/while-youre-getting-esa/challenging-an-esa-decision/
    https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/benefits/benefits-introduction/problems-with-benefits-and-tax-credits/challenging-a-benefit-decision/challenging-a-dwp-benefit-decision-on-or-after-28-october-2013/appealing-against-a-benefit-decision/appealing-against-a-dwp-benefit-decision/

    Some useful info from epitome in his posts - thanks.

    Good luck

    Edit: I would put the wording epitome has suggested above in the MR request. It's a difference of opinion on tactics only. But the MR has time limits - I would get it in asap
    Last edited by Alice Holt; 22-12-2017 at 9:28 AM.
    • butterflies56
    • By butterflies56 2nd Jan 18, 6:46 PM
    • 39 Posts
    • 28 Thanks
    butterflies56
    Thank you Alice
    Hi Alice

    Thank you very much for your information
    I very much appreciate your time to post the links


    Last edited by butterflies56; 19-03-2018 at 12:18 PM. Reason: personal info
    • butterflies56
    • By butterflies56 2nd Jan 18, 7:26 PM
    • 39 Posts
    • 28 Thanks
    butterflies56
    Here's a link Epitome!
    How did you find out about the new UT case coming in January? Any links?

    The thread itself is a few years old so shows how long this problem has been going on

    https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/5928/P120 starts at post 127

    https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/5928/P150 post 161 mentions UT

    Hope this helps
    • butterflies56
    • By butterflies56 20th Jan 18, 2:57 PM
    • 39 Posts
    • 28 Thanks
    butterflies56
    Update on ESA backdate restriction
    Hi everyone

    After having ESA EDP backdate restricted to 21 October 2014(LH v SSWP).

    I asked for a Mandatory Reconsideration and told the DWP I would be sending this by letter which I put together with a lot of valuable help from Epitome.
    The Mandatory Reconsideration was done based on my phone call. So the DWP did not wait for my letter even though I asked them to...so none of my questions were answered!

    Anyway, I have now completed SSCS1 Form and used my original Mandatory Reconsideration Letter as the basis for the appeal.
    I have asked for a paper based appeal as I am 100% housebound so cannot get out of the house.
    Anyway, I just wanted to let you know the situation so far and I would not have got this far without the much needed help and support on here.
    Will keep you posted of any further developments
    • epitome
    • By epitome 23rd Jan 18, 10:20 PM
    • 3,160 Posts
    • 1,916 Thanks
    epitome
    Did you get them to explain what specific law was clarified by the UT that they are now applying to your case?

    And why it is being applied to your case...as yours is (IMHO) not a supersession and if it is a supersession then it is a supersession brought about by DWP error... which is not the same as the UT case.
    Did you also ask for DWP special payment of compensation to cover your losses prior to October 2014 for the DWP error?

    Although they went ahead and treated your man Recon on the basis of your phonecall that does not stop you from writing what you would have written for the MR to them and the MR department will look at what you send in. You can also ask for a verbal explanation from the MR decision maker to ask those questions above .

    You have an MRnotice letter, there should be a detailed explanation can you either photograph it (blank out your address and reference no.) or type it out here?
    Last edited by epitome; 23-01-2018 at 10:25 PM.
    • butterflies56
    • By butterflies56 24th Jan 18, 11:59 AM
    • 39 Posts
    • 28 Thanks
    butterflies56
    here's the MR decision
    Did you get them to explain what specific law was clarified by the UT that they are now applying to your case?

    And why it is being applied to your case...as yours is (IMHO) not a supersession and if it is a supersession then it is a supersession brought about by DWP error... which is not the same as the UT case.
    Did you also ask for DWP special payment of compensation to cover your losses prior to October 2014 for the DWP error?

    Although they went ahead and treated your man Recon on the basis of your phonecall that does not stop you from writing what you would have written for the MR to them and the MR department will look at what you send in. You can also ask for a verbal explanation from the MR decision maker to ask those questions above .

    You have an MRnotice letter, there should be a detailed explanation can you either photograph it (blank out your address and reference no.) or type it out here?
    Originally posted by epitome
    It's a text version of scanned MR letter...

    "Your Mandatory Reconsideration Notice

    You or someone who has the authority to act for you. asked us to look again at the decision we
    sent on

    We have taken into account all the information available.
    We have not changed our decision.

    An explanation of our Mandatory Reconsideration decision is set out below.


    Mandatory Reconsideration - Employment and support Allowance Income
    Related (ESAIR)
    On a decision was made to convert your award of Incapacity Benefit {lB) to
    Contributory Employment and Support Allowance (ESA(C)) only.

    You were issued with form ESA1 (which was treated as an ESA3 review form) to
    enable you to provide information so we could consider entitlement to Income Related
    Employment and Support Allowance (ESA (IR). We received the completed form on


    On a decision was made to award ESA (IR) from 21/10/14.

    On you asked us to look at this decision again and for you to be awarded ESA
    (IR) from when your award of IB was converted to Contributory ESA.

    I have reconsidered this decision. As a result. I have decided that the decision not to
    award ESA (IR) from the date your award was converted to ESA is correct in law.

    When an award of IB is converted to ESA. the law requires a calculation of the amount
    of ESA you would be entitled to as if you had made a claim for it. This requires
    consideration of whether you are entitled to either Contributory or Income Related
    ESA or both. The decision made on did not consider entitlement to income
    Related ESA and was therefore erroneous in law.

    However, the principle that a claim for ESA requires full consideration of both
    Contributory and Income Related ESA was established in a decision of the Upper
    Tribunal dated 21!10i14 (this is known as the lead case). The law requires that in other similar cases, where a decision is changed following a lead case. the other decisions to be changed are not erroneous in law for any period before the date of the Upper Tribunal decision on the lead case.

    I therefore cannot change the decision dated so as to award ESA (IR)

    !!!8216; from

    The law used to make this decision

    The Employment and Support Allowance (Transitional Provisions. Housing

    !!!8217; Benefit and Council Tax Benefit) (Existing Awards) (No. 2) Regulations 2010,
    regulation 8(1)

    The Social Security and Child Support (Decision Making and Appeals)
    Regulations 1999, regulation 3(1)()b). 6(2)(b) and 7(6)

    Social Security Act 1998. section 27

    Case Law: LH v SSWP (ESA) [2014] UKUT 480 (AAC); [2105] AACFI 14."

    I have also rang them again for a call back to answer the questions that I sent in my letter received by them 2days after their decision.

    Thanks again Epitome for all your help
    Last edited by butterflies56; 19-03-2018 at 11:58 AM. Reason: removed dates
    • epitome
    • By epitome 30th Jan 18, 11:34 PM
    • 3,160 Posts
    • 1,916 Thanks
    epitome
    I have not forgotten you, I am just busy...sorry
    • speedfreek1000
    • By speedfreek1000 31st Jan 18, 10:26 AM
    • 333 Posts
    • 262 Thanks
    speedfreek1000
    If you haven't already you might want to follow developments in this thread

    https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/5928/

    As they brought up the issue and also believe that the DWP are incorrectly applying the law by adopting a cut off of October 2014.
    • epitome
    • By epitome 31st Jan 18, 11:10 PM
    • 3,160 Posts
    • 1,916 Thanks
    epitome
    I will reply in different colour to the points I wish to...



    "Your Mandatory Reconsideration Notice

    You or someone who has the authority to act for you. asked us to look again at the decision we
    sent on 12/12/17.

    We have taken into account all the information available.
    We have not changed our decision.

    An explanation of our Mandatory Reconsideration decision is set out below.


    Mandatory Reconsideration - Employment and support Allowance Income
    Related (ESAIR)
    On 8/12/12 a decision was made to convert your award of Incapacity Benefit {lB) to
    Contributory Employment and Support Allowance (ESA(C)) only.

    You were issued with form ESA1 <it should say on what date the ESA1 was issued> (which was treated as an ESA3 review form) to
    enable you to provide information so we could consider entitlement to Income Related
    Employment and Support Allowance (ESA (IR). We received the completed form on
    27/9/17.

    On 12/12/17 a decision was made to award ESA (IR) from 21/10/14.

    On 2/1/18 you asked us to look at this decision again and for you to be awarded ESA
    (IR) from 26/12/12 when your award of IB was converted to Contributory ESA.

    I have reconsidered this decision. As a result. I have decided that the decision not to
    award ESA (IR) from the date your award was converted to ESA is correct in law.

    When an award of IB is converted to ESA. the law requires a calculation of the amount
    of ESA you would be entitled to as if you had made a claim for it. This requires
    consideration of whether you are entitled to either Contributory or Income Related
    ESA or both. The decision made on 8/10/12 did not consider entitlement to income
    Related ESA and was therefore erroneous in law.

    However, the principle that a claim for ESA requires full consideration of both
    Contributory and Income Related ESA was established in a decision of the Upper
    Tribunal dated 21!10i14 (this is known as the lead case). The law requires that in other similar cases, where a decision is changed following a lead case. the other decisions to be changed are not erroneous in law for any period before the date of the Upper Tribunal decision on the lead case.

    I therefore cannot change the decision dated 12/12/17 so as to award ESA (IR) from 26/12/12.

    My intial reply would be...And you can send this to Man Recon again for them to give you a further response.

    Dear Sirs,

    You have agreed that the DWP failed to follow the law, <I still have not found the exact law, but it is not important> in 2012 when I was migrated from IB to ESA.

    The lead case that you refer to was that of awarding ESA IR due to supersession, appeal or revision backdated to the effective date of the revision. This was a case where ESA had been claimed and was in payment as ESA Contributory. Subsequently the Support Group was allowed and the claimant requested ESA IR back to the start of the claim. The tribunal refused backdating to the start of the claim but allowed it to a date of supersession -the date the SG had been awarded from-. My case is that of an IB/IS migration to ESA, where the DWP were required by law to assess me for ESA IR at the time of migration in 2012. The DWP erroneously did not assess me for ESA IR until 2017/2018.

    The two scenarios presented between the lead case and my case are wholly separate are not similar in any way. I am not asking for backdating of ESA to a date of supersession. I am asking for backdating of ESA to the date of inception of ESA as a result of migration. I am asking for this to be done only because due process was not followed by yourselves at that time. In 2012 the DWP was fully aware of their responsibilities to assess all migratory claimants for ESA IR. This is not something the DWP only became aware of after what you refer to as the lead case. Therefore I believe you are in error and backdating should be allowed to date of migration.

    You should also be saying to them..

    You have agreed that I have been paid arrears of more than 5000 and covering a period of more than 1 year due to DWP error. DWP policy requires such cases to be sent to the DWP special payments unit for compensatory consideration... I mentioned this in my Mandatory Reconsideration letter and I asked in that letter for compensation to be considered equal to the amount of Income Related ESA that the DWP have witheld from me that I would otherwise have been paid from 26/12/2012 - 20/10/2014 were it not for the DWP error that took place in 2012 and for the Upper Tribunal "Lead case" that you refer to, the decision of which, bars you from paying arrears of ESA IR before 21/10/2014.

    To clarify.. if the DWP cannot pay "arrears of ESA" before this date then I ask the DWP for compensation to be paid to me, equal to the amount of the barred ESA IR arrears 26/12/2012 - 20/10/2014.
    I also request that general compensation payment is considered in line with DWP policy, on the basis that I have already been paid a substantial amount of arrears due to DWP error.
    Please confirm that my case has been sent to the DWP compensation/Special payments unit as is required by DWP policy and as I have previously requested.

    Last edited by epitome; 26-05-2018 at 10:22 AM.
    • butterflies56
    • By butterflies56 5th Feb 18, 7:10 PM
    • 39 Posts
    • 28 Thanks
    butterflies56
    If you haven't already you might want to follow developments in this thread

    https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/5928/

    As they brought up the issue and also believe that the DWP are incorrectly applying the law by adopting a cut off of October 2014.
    Originally posted by speedfreek1000
    Hi speedfreek
    Thank you very much for the link
    Last edited by butterflies56; 19-03-2018 at 12:21 PM. Reason: personal info
    • butterflies56
    • By butterflies56 5th Feb 18, 7:14 PM
    • 39 Posts
    • 28 Thanks
    butterflies56
    Hi Epitome

    Thank you very much again for taking time to reply and
    Thanks again for your help. it's very much appreciated!
    Last edited by butterflies56; 19-03-2018 at 12:22 PM. Reason: personal info
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

94Posts Today

1,968Users online

Martin's Twitter