I am appealing against a Local Authority decision to recover a HB overpayment because it was an official error. After 2 and half years a tribunal date has finally been set!

My client informed the LA over the phone that she had started work on the Monday of that same week. A record of that call was made, but she was advised that she must put it in writing before it could be actioned. She did submit a written statement at her neighbourhood office, but was not given a receipt. It appears they lost this statement. They did not cease her claimm until one month and create an overpayment after receiving a notification form the DWP.

Can anyone point me in the direction of legislation caselaw which states that a change of circumstances must be notified in writing. I'm not convinced that they couldn't, cease/suspend a period on the basis of information received over the telephone.

All changes of circ's concerning HB/CTB must be in writing i'm afraid. See Reg 75(1) of the HB Gen Regs 1987.

Paul

True, but might it be possible to argue that the LA could legimately (and ought reasonably to) have suspended benefit having come by information that threw doubt on continuing entitlement? Under Reg 11 of the Decisions and Appeals Regs it only has to "appear to the LA" that the conditions for entitlement are not met in order to be able to suspend.

Maybe I am wrong, but is it normal for LA's to just let cheques continue to go out when they have been told something like this, in writing or not?

I do not know if I'm right, or even if it would work as an argument but I offer it anyway!

There is a duty under Reg 75 to notify a change of circumstances in writing, but a breach of that duty may not of itself be the cause of the overpayment

Disclosure can be done orally (see R(SB)20/84 para 5 and R(SB)15/87 para 13)

It was held in CIS222/1991 that if the relvant authority has information that indicates that further enquiries nedd to be made, and those enquiries are not made, then the resulting overpayment may be an official error.

The burden of proving either failure to disclose, or misrepresentation rests on the Council, as does the burden of proving that your client could resonably be expected to realise that the payments (s)he received were overpayments. (See R(H)1/02 and CH4065/2001).

Thanks. I'll let you know the outcome.

We won. The tribunal decided that it was due to Local Authority error because they ceased the claim late. They didn't accept the Local Authority's arguement that she didn't inform them in writing, as they have evidence that the LA ceased based on the information the tenant gave them, at the correct time..

I agree that the OP was caused by LA error (and that the tribunal could not have come to any other decision) BUT what did the tribunal do about the strict test on recoverability of such OP's.

many tribunals are assuming that official error HB or CTB OP's are not recoverable (I assume as a result of law elsewhere) but that is not the case.