I work for an RSL and deal with decisions from LA's on recovery of HB overpaid to us as landlord.

In this case the tnt's HB (which is paid to us) is reduced for 16 weeks due to a non-dep dedn before reverting to ‘full’ HB.

3 months later and out of the blue we receive a lump sum from the LA which works out as the difference between NDD and full benefit for the 16 weeks.

LA then writes saying lump was paid in error and is a recoverable from us. I appealed on the basis that we did not contribute to error and could not have been reasonably expected to have been aware that it was an overpayment.

They are now hinting - but not quite saying - that it may not have been an overpayment of HB at all; that no determination has been made but that due to some sort of computer glitch we were sent this money by accident.

Compare for example: you are entitled to £188.40 per 4- weeks DLA but are sent £1884.00 by accident. Is this an overpayment of DLA or just a payment of cash made in error which you are not entitled to - recoverable at common law(?).

Thoughts welcome.

They are all overpayments caused by official error and the relevant primary legislation and regulations apply.

I have a standard submission that I use for HB cases as they keep coming up every now and then.

I have been successful at Tribunals and so I am confident that my submision is correct

stainsby; I was wondering if you could share your submsion/template with me. I have a client who was o/paid due to a computer glitch. She did not contribute and could not have realised as at the time she was expecting a backdated payment following c.o.c and there was an underpayment. She simply thought the money landed in her account as a result of reassessment. We are not talking a shocking amount which would arose her suspicions. Would your submission be suitable?
I am not sure how to exchange email addresses at this forum. Is there a private messaging system?

I had not seen your reply, but my email address is
dstainsby@(removetheremove)gallionsha.co.uk

Just to flesh out Stainsby's response...

So long as there was otherwise an ongoing award in place, any additional payment produced by the LA's benefits system is indisputably an error and the payments are equally indisputably HB. Only if there had been no claim / award in place could the monies be regarded as being other than benefit (this assumes "double" payments are not at issue here).

Is it recoverable? Agreed, the LL did not contribute to the cause of the o/p. So, that leaves "realise".

One question that springs to mind is this: during the period of the overpayment, did the clmt make payments of rent that substantially, or completely, covered the rental liability? If so, it *may* be argued by the LA that the LL could reasonably have been expected to realise there was an overpayment at the time of the payment. On the other hand, if the LL received notification of higher benefit, the LL would presumably argue it could not reasonably be expected to realise there was an overpayment.

In any case, I would appeal - the LA will then have to argue before a FtT that the o/p is not benefit. I have no doubt a FtT will metaphorically laugh at the LA on that specific point (based on the info given so far). But, the "recoverability" question is never a slam dunk, so a bit of care is needed with that aspect.

Thanks to both - you have set my mind at rest!