I have an elderly client who failed to disclose that she was in receipt of her late husband's private pensions; as a result an o/p occurred. I argued that not recoverable as client could not reasonably have been expected to know (as husband dealt with everything financial during the long marriage).
As a result, whilst no change of decision, the LA have said that in the circumstances they will not seek to recover. This is obv the reult we wanted, but I have a couple of questions plese:
1. Should we still appeal to TAS to have a formal decision on the recoverability of the O/P (Of course it might not go our way).
2. There is a large debt (£1000) on the rent account as HB stopped being paid. We asked for a fresh claim to be backdated, and also for the LA to carry out a setting off exercise to reduce the o/p amount. HB is now being paid, albeit at a samll amount.

Is there any scope for asking for the HB that she would have been entitled to to be paid to the landlords?
Or not? I think I can guess that it would be no - but can anyone shed any light please?
Much appreciated.

I would suggest that you get written cofirmation that the LA will not be seeking to recover the overpayment, once this is done, there will be no need for you to appeal to the TAS.
The backdating request is a separate issue if a fresh claim was not put in after the previous one was cancelled, you will need to show "good cause" this will have to be continuous.
There will be no need to request that this overpayment be recovered from the tenant's ongoing entitlement if the LA has agreed to write it off in the first place..

I am not quite sure I grasp the bit amount payments of HB to the Landlord, the tenant may still opt to have her HB paid to her and she forwards the money to the Landlord who could also request that HB payments be made direct to them, the LA would have to exercise their discretion on this depending on the particular circumstances.

Just an observation about a "recoverable" overpayment.

Assuming that your client was the claimant, I would be very very surprised if the LA agreed that the o/p was not a "recoverable overpayment". If they have agreed not to recover, it sounds (based on the info provided) as if the LA have decided to use their discretion not to recover.

So, why the surprise? The info in your post strongly suggests that there was no "official error" towards the o/p. If that was correct, then the overpayment is deemed recoverable irrespective of any other matters (including the issue of the knowledge of your client).

I mention this in the context of strongly agreeing with Moufassa's post that it is important to get written confirmation from the LA about their intention to recover (or not) the overpayment.

Regards
Kevin D