Never come across this before so feeling a bit uncertain!

Cl, 64, single DLA MRC LRM (blind) GPC.

Cl was previously receieving £175 p/w PC which he states included a transitional allowance of £22 p/w. It seems that transitional allowance was "eroded" in december 2005 when housing costs of £40 were "awarded" (acording to letter from the Pension service)

Client now only receives £160 p/w (presumably single person + disabilty premium).

I cant beleieve that cl was only awarded housing costs in December 2005 as he has been on IS/PC for years so I am assuming that the award of housing costs was actually an increase, maybe related to a change in interest rates.

Cl of course is not happy, the housing costs added to his applicaple amount have wiped out his transitional allowance but he has ended up worse off. If I have got the facts straight then I suspect this is actually right but have I missed anything as it just seems a bit unfair?

How long has your client been on IS/PC?

Long enough to have originally been on suplemental benefit (before my time!!) I suspect that he also had some transitional protection on the change from SB to IS.

Have just spoken to client again, in fact the award of Housing costs was a new award..he had previosly cleared his mortgage but then moved and had to take a small aditional mortgage for the purpose. Not sure this really changes the point though as it still somehow seems unfair, if he had moved into rented accom and claimed HB his transitional protection would have remained. Any thoughts?

Look at regulation 14 of The Income Support (Transitional) Regulations 1987. A transitional addition is reduced as a persons IS Applicable Amount goes up, and entitlement to the addition ends when the applicable amount reduces the addition to nil.

since the housing costs increased your clients Applicable Amount above his transitional award then he loses it.

Thank you loliver. I think my instict at the start was right and this there is not going to be anywhere to go with this but I am still clutching at straws....

What if say, client originally recieved Housing Costs on the change from IS/MIG to PC and his transitional allowance was set accordingly. Cl then goes on to finish paying his mortgage so that housing costs are removed and his applicable ammount reduces. Presumably his trans allowance remains intact. So if later he re-establishes entitlement to housing costs this is an increase in his app amm and so his transitional allowance is reduced/wiped out. Would I have any argument to use in that he is now worse off than he was on the switch from IS to PC?

If any one has any other suggestions on this it would be most welcome as I am nearing the deadline for appeal and so far have no grounds for appeal other then "it's a bit unfair innit guvner" which somehow I don't think will get off the starting block. If I am wasting my time then please tell me!