Hi. I seem to remember there being a Comms decision released either last year or the year before where someone had used the argument that a revision etc was required before an overpayment was recoverable and DWP had gone and made a further decision, including the revision. I think the Commissioner had said basically that this was allowed. Can anyone remember which case this was? I want to find it as I have similar case and I want to see what circumstances this would apply.

there was an article on technical overopayments in adviser 97 (may/june 2003) by fiona seymour of citizens advice ... do you have a copy?

Yep, just read it and it has the case in it that I was looking for , tvm. (CIS/362/02 in case anybody wondering, also going to have a look at CSIS/460/02 which looks a bit more helpful)

The arguments re technical arguemnts re overpayments have to an extent been superseded (sic) by the Tribunal of Commisioners decision CIB4751/2002

Tribunals will now be more likely to correct errors in decisions, and then go on to use their inquisitorial role to ascertain the facts and come to their own decision, rather than just allowing tha appeal and ruling that there is no overpayment.

I'm not convinced that they can do much in the case of technical overpayments. As I understand the above case, they can remedy a DM saying they superseded the decision when they should have revised etc however, if the appeal is only about recoverability because lack of evidence of revision etc of ongoing award, I'm not sure they can go as far as carrying out that revision as its a separate decision and not part of the appeal. In other words, they can remedy a process that has been carried out incorectly but can't start a whole new process off from scratch. However, I'm sure one or two of them will try.

Case I have is one which has already been successful on technical grounds so I'm trying arging finality of Tribunal decisions as per CIS/460/02. However, have also got a 'substantive' issue as well.

Our unit has recently had a successful decision by Commissioner Bano(CIS/3228/2003) which touched on the above, and other, issues. Particularly the point about when the appeal is only concerned with recoverability. Commissioner Bano substitued a new decision in the client's favour - finding that the overpayment was not recoverable. In this case the S of S was unable to show that an outcome decision had been made. If there is no outcome there are no 'defects in the (outcome) decision'(CIB/4751/2002) to be corrected by the tribunal!

there's a summary of CIS/3228/2003 in briefcase @
http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/cgi-bin/publisher/display.cgi?1715-0104-6214+swopshop#CIS/3228/2003