I have a client who we helped claim WTC with the disability element for 2008/2009 which was the only thing that made her eligible. She has now completed a review form and has been told that she has been overpaid since April 2009 because she no longer qualifies for the disability element, she continues to satisfy the disability test but cannot satisfy any of the additional criteria (originally got it because she had been in receipt of long term IB for at least 1 day in the preceding 182 days immediately before claiming).
Spoke to Tax Credit helpline who confirmed this is correct but I am not convinced.
Any help please?
Thanx Michelle

I don't think the helpline are correct.

Have a look at the WTC regs SI 2005/2002 Reg 9 (2) Case G

In addition to work 16hrs and having a disability that puts you at a disadvantage of getting a job, you have to come under one of the Cases listed in the Regs.

You said that initially she met this through IB, which would be Case A.

Case G says that you meet the criteria if you were entitled to the disability element of WTC, for at least one day in the preceding 56 days, by virtue of having satisfied Case A, B, E or F at the earlier time.

So your client qualified under Case A originally, and it seems to me that she should continue to qualify under Case G providing there were no breaks in her claim so that the 56 days are not satisfied.

If you think this is the case I would suggest an appeal.

Victoria

Thanx for that Victoria, I didn't think it could be right and have now looked at case G and believe client should still qualify so will fight on!
Michelle

I have a case which is more or less identical. One TCO helpline person said she should get it, and another said no. We will appeal. Hows your case going?

Brian Harris NDCAB

Appeal still pending on this case
Thanx for your replies

Happy Christmas one and all

Following a letter to TCO, the compliance team have reinstated the disability element. However they phoned to say they were going to seek higher manager view and may change their mind again!
They said that the client should not have ticked the DE box on the annual review form as she has ceased to receive a qualifying benefit several years ago so has failed to notify and could be in an overpayment situation.

I need to check one of these forms, I think it says do not tick if you ceased to receive a qualifying benefit in the last year.
In my clients case she ceased to receive IB before the WTC claim, so there had been no change.
She did not tick on the first renewal, but was told by a friend that she should have. She contacted TCO who reinstated in 2006.

I have raised this case as a Social Policy issue.

Happy New Year
Give my regards to Nick Permain who volunteers in Maidstone

Brian Harris NDCAB Ilfracombe

Brian - in your case, was the disability element removed originally (before you sent your letter) by compliance?

Victoria

Disability element was paid for several years when client had a partner.
Relationship broke down so client closed claim and immediately made a new one as a single person. Complence wrote to her to say they thought she must have ticked box by mistake and they believe she is not in receipt of a qualifying benefit (assume they can check DLA records). They processed claim removing DE.
Client phoned to complain. We then wrote appeal letter.

Brian

Got one very similar - however due to a "problem" with TCO systems the claim for our client was ended - wrongly - we've had a letter from Barry Malone a CSSG Manager which basically states that due to a problem with TCO systems our client has now had a 56 day break in claim and so cannot qualify for the disability element again.

This cannot be right surely????!!!

I am appealing now.

I have raised this issue through the consultation group, so if anyone wants to forward further details, feel free to contact me through our website (www.litrg.org.uk) or email me victoriatodd29@yahoo.co.uk

Re the last post: Has a new claim now been made? If TCO ended the old claim incorrectly, then it should be reinstated which means the criteria would be met.

Victoria
(LITRG)

Hi Victoria

Yes she made the new claim and has now also provided all details requested for the years where the TCO did not ask her to renew.

They are basically saying that as it's now a new claim the disability element cannot apply.

In the appeal we have stated that she should not have been invited to make a new claim when it was discovered that she had not been asked to do her annual declarations and so had not renewed her claim - but rather they should have put their mistake right and done the renewals instead and so as they ended the claim incorrectly then it needs to be reinstated, which as you say would mean that the criteria would be met.

The incompetence still amazes me sometimes.

Thanks

Nicky

Have had 'phone call today from compliance team at TCO who have looked at the appeal and reinstated the disability element from 2007.

Shame it took so long for them to see the obvious.