Hi I am a bit confused so i was wondering if anyone can help me. I lady who is in receipt of Pension Credit (Guaranteed) and has an AIP set until 2009. Beginning of this year she sold her house and moved to sheltered accommodation. She said she notified the Pension Service of the change and they told her that they could not make that change because of the AIP. This means she will be overpaid until 2009. She is worried sick that this will cause an overpayment and paying it all back is going to be too much for her. I have spoken to Pension Service they make no sense. Can anyone make sense of this and help me with this?

Mon 14-May-07 10:41 AM by penny newell

She has not been overpaid - I know its hard to believe this is correct and assure her!
Its an issue that has been causing worries for sometime now. Have a look at previous postings here.

A previous related discussion forum thread -

http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=890&mode=full

"I have spoken to Pension Service they make no sense".

So no change there then!

I have always thought the same that no overpayment.

But CPC/206/2005 is causing me some concern.

Its "nutshelled" in current issue of adviser on page 17.

The lady in this case told PC that she was selling her home at the time of the claim and moving to sheltered accomodation. An AIP was set. Then later when the house was sold and PC revised the decision to a nil award.

Commissioner found that there was an official error but substituted this that AIP should not have been set and the claim superseded from the date the proceeds of the house were received to the same effect that no longer entitled.

There was no overpayment issue as PC acted surprisingly promptly but what if they didnt?

I am therefore concerned as to the effects of this decision with relation to this area.

Sorry if I am panicing over nothing.

Is the Commissioner saying that it is not appropriate to set an AIP if you know in advance that there is almost certainly going to be a humungous change of circs in the enar future? That at least would seem to be an understandable approach. It then suggeststhat if the change was not forseeable at the time the claim was processed and AIP set, then you might just be lucky. But I have to admit I haven't read the case.

This is why there's the question on the PC claim form about 'expecting' money in the next 12 months.

I think this could be a very difficult area, particularly if someone is in the position of wanting to do something *if* they are in an AIP. Can they have an expectation of something which is dependant upon a decision of a 3rd party?