My understanding is that the AIP does not apply to claimants in receipt of pension savings credit only. Can anyone confirm if this is the case and if so does such a claimant therefore have to declare increase in capital and income to the Beneifts Unit and how does the following fit in with this.

I have a claimant who was on pension credit and then partner claimed retirement pension, income increased and so pension credit stopped and only pension savings credit continued. Would any AIP that was previously in place therefore become invalid at point that pension credit stopped?

Finally after pension criedit stopped above claimant declared increase in income to BU, HB and CTB amended accoridngly but only from date of notification even though change in circumstances was two months previously and normally an overpayment would have occurred. This seems to suggest that either AIP still stands even when only entitlement to savings credit and there was actually no requirement for claimant to declare change in circumstances or that he was required to do so but there is still some protection in place that prevented the overpayment.

Any explanations or comments gratefully received

Wed 14-Jan-09 03:02 PM by Gareth Morgan

AIPs apply to Pension Credit regardless of type, GPC or PC- Savings.

But... if PC stopped when the partner's income increased then they weren't in an AIP at that time, or there's been an error.

Or... the agency knew that the income was going to arrive at that date and the AIP was originally set to run to that date.

An AIP would not be specified if one of the couple were aged under 60 at the time of the award (reg 10(1)(a))

An AIP will end at the point at which the claimant or their partner become 65 (sect. 9(4)(c) and (d))

So there would have either not have been an AIP in place at the time of claiming RP or the AIP would have ended at the time of the RP claim depending on the partner's sex.

Retirement pension is not 'retirement provision' and therefore any change in rp being paid will change the PC award irrespective of an AIP being in place.

I don't understand why the HB/CTB wasn't amended at the time of the change in circumstances as the couple would have been assessed at nil income whilst they were in receipt of GC only and then the LA would have had to have used the Pensions Service calculations of income and capital once they were granted SC.

Wed 14-Jan-09 04:50 PM by Gareth Morgan

All true; I assumed from the phrasing that there was an AIP in force and that it was a pension being taken that ended the AIP rather than an age 65 decision.

For an AIP to exist the claimant's partner must, as you say, not be under 60.

The claimant must also be 65 or over.

That implies that for non same-sex couples, where the male is older, both would have reached the age for claiming a SRP before an AIP can be set.

For male same-sex couples, or where the female is older, then the age 65 rule would coincide with SRP claims.

There would then be a revision, an assessment based on the new income and any other CoCs and a fresh AIP. If that produced a SC only entitlement then the LA should have been sent, as you say, the new figures to use for HB / CTB.

I can't see there being anyway in which a recoverable OP could be caused under those circumstances.

Changes in SRP alone would normally be dealt with as deemed variations.