I have a client in a situation which seems unfair (I know that's not unusual but I live in hope). She has a learning disability but managed to work 30 hours per week and so was entitled to WTC without the disability element from her date of claim in April 2007. She applied for DLA in May 2007 and after a protracted dispute she got a decision in May 2008 awarding LRC and LRM from May 2007. She told the TCO straight away but has got the dis element only from May 2008.

If entitlement to WTC had depended on entitlement to DLA and she had claimed DLA before the WTC claim and had informed the TCO, the rejected WTC claim could have been resurrected and backdated to May 2007 (reg 7 & 8 of the claims and notification regs 2002) but I can't find any regs allowing backdating in this case. The regs and guidance seem to deal only with claims which have initially been refused and depend on the TCO being informed that a DLA claim was pending. There was no reason for my client to think she needed to tell the TCO that she had made a DLA claim or was disputing it after WTC had been awarded.

I am looking at the very same thing myself and looked up Rnet tro see if anyone had the answer...and there was your question!

As I read TC(C+N) Reg 26 (3) if you have an existing claim for WTC (as oppsed to making a new claim), unless you notify that you are seeking/appealing DLA etc such as, on success would bring you into entitlement to the disability/severe disability element then you are stuck with the max 3 mth backdate provided for in Reg 25. Only if you notify of what you are doing can the element be included to that earlier date of notification. I think therefore you can get 3 mths backdate.

The situation seems far more favourable for IS claimants who become entitled to a qulifying benefit and can have their IS award revised form the start date of the qualifying benefit once a decision on the qualifying benefit is made.

I agree entirely that to think of notifying the TCO that you are seeking DLA or going for a supersession when you have no idea whether the result will affect DLA seems to impute far more knowledge and foresight than seems reasonable to a TCO claimant. Hence intrinsically unfair!!

Sue

Unfortunately I have to agree that my client cannot get backdating for more than 3 months. Social Policy evidence form required!

SP form already done!!!....and re another client who was getting the WTC disability element (through qualifying benefit of DLA LRC+LRM). She asked for a supersession. No change of decision on the supersession: finally awarded HRC on reconsideration and promptly told TCO. But could only get the severe dsiability element addition for the max 3 month backdate.

Seems grossly unfair particulalry when compared to an an existing IS claimant who would have had full backdating of relevant premiums.

Hi

We have for some time felt that the requirement for claimants to notify HMRC that they have applied for the qualifying benefit is unnecessary. Most people would have no reason to think that it would be necessary and it has never been very well detailed on their website and in the notes etc....

We have raised this with the consultation group and the relevant team in HMRC are now looking at the issue. These examples are really useful in showing just how unfair the requirement is and how people are missing out on backdating.

As soon as we find out anything further I will post an update.

Victoria