My client has an alleged overpayment of income support which was decided in June 2002. I have just received the 'overpayment decision' from DWP archives, after a delay of some months. Cl was not clear what the o/p was for.

It states:

"We have looked at the decision dated ... awarding Income Support from .... There has been a relevant range of circumstance since the decision was given." "Our decision is that .... was entitled to a reduced award of Income support for the period as shown on the attached schedule."

It also identifies a relevant material fact that the cl failed to disclose.

There is no mention of a revision or a supersession, as I understand it, an overpayment is not legally recoverable unless the original decision awarding benefit has been revised or superseded (s.71(5) SSAA).

Am I correct in thinking this can therefore be challenged for official error and that a corrected supersession notice would then have a new one month appeal period? There may be argument that cl did not fail to disclose.

I think that what you are quoting from is the revision, unfortunately. It clearly identifies the decision which needs to be revised ("We have looked at the decision dated..."), and then goes on to revise it.

I agree the wording could be improved, but it used to be the case that "overpayment decisions" would often simply say "Due to a change in your circumstances you have been overpaid X amount of benefit for the period....to....".

It was those that you could succesfully run a s.71(5) argument with - there was clearly not even an attempt at revision/supersession. I know this may not have been the response you wanted, sorry.