Time limit on recovery of administrative penalty?

Client tells me he was overpaid in 2003 and accepted an administrative penalty of £240. He repaid the overpayment in full at the time but was paying the penalty in instalments (he referred to it as a “fine” but it clearly wasn’t). Recovery stopped in 2006 before amount was repaid (in circumstances I do not know). Has now received demand for balance of £197.

He wants to know if there is any limitation period beyond which they cannt pursue recovery - i.e. have they written to him too late to take any court action should he refuse to pay the balance?

My gut feeling is that there isn’t any limitation but I would be grateful if anyone who does know the answer could tell me one way or the other

Thanks

Brian

This is a civil matter - see this thread:

http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/2700/

As such I would expect the Statute of Limitations to apply - just as I believe it does to recovery of any overpayment.

If I am right then it all depends when the last payment or other acknowledgement of the debt (if later than the last payment) was made; if more than 6 years prior to the current demand then recovery is statute barred.

However, that just prevents Court action.  The debt still exists and can still be chased, & I see no reason why it could not be collected by deduction from ongoing benefit payments.

OK thanks for that help Derek

Following Joseph v Newham Borough Council, where the court decided that the Limitation Act applied to deductions from ongoing housing benefit payments then it is, in my view, arguable that this could also apply to deductions from DWP benefits.  This is because sections 75 and 71 of the Admin Act use similar expressions, i.e. “this section”, “any amount” and “any payment”.  I don’t know if anyone has tried this yet.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2009/2983.html

However, there is some disagreement whether the Judge in that case got right in the light of conflicting case law.  Consequently, the DWP is likely to argue that Joseph should not be followed.

http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/227/

Edited to add link.