HB upgrading new decision? 

my view would be that it is a new decision letter - presumably the rates are different so it’s not the same decision anyway. A decision about entitlement carries appeal rights - it doesn’t matter which aspect of the entitlement he’s disputing - I think you’re quite right.

They are wrong probably - it’s a new decision if it has changed in any way from the previous one.

If the rent has changed from April, that alone requires a superseding decision; in addition if it’s a case where the claimant has income above the applicable amount then the new calculation on the uprated applicable amount requires a superseding decision.  That decision is then appealable in the usual way on any grounds.

If there has been no change to the rent and no uprated means test calculation, they might have gone through the motions of issuing a new decision letter anyway: most LA systems are geared to a bulk uprating exercise each April.  But if there is no change to the outcome it is arguable that no new decision has been made at this stage.

If the Council accepts that it has made a superseding decision but argues there is no right to appeal against it on a ground that relates to a matter which was present in an earlier decision and was either not appealed at all or was appealed unsuccessfully, the Council is simply wrong.  In your case it sounds as if there was no appeal against the April 2013 decision and the consequences of that are that it has become final so the claimant has lost out on a year’s worth of HB if s/he wins the appeal against the new decision.  Even if there was an unsuccessful appeal against the earlier decision, that does not prevent the claimant from appealaing against a future decision on the same ground. See for example CH/1330/2002 where the claimant was first disqualified from IS going forward from April 1999 because of excess capital: she appealed and lost; meanwhile there had been a further decision revising previous IS awards and creating an overpayment - she was entitled to challenge this separate decision on the same grounds.

If someone has appealed unsuccessfully against the bedroom tax in a previous year and brings a repeat appeal every time the Council makes a new decision it will get to the stage where the Tribunal strikes out the appeal on the grounds that it stands no reasonable chance of success.  But it is for the Tribunal to make that decision, not the Council.

A brief related question - can people who appear to be able to take advantage of the bedroom tax loophole for the period it was active still request an any time revision outside of the 13 months on the grounds of official error?

Yes they can, but if the Council refuses there is no right of appeal against that.  I think it is accepted by most councils that it is technically an offical error and so any-time revision shouldn’t be a problem

Thanks for all the comments, all of which strengthen what I feel to be the case: i.e. that a new decision letter with new figures carries with it a new right of appeal.  The LA has sent this appeal to the Tribunals Service for a decision as to whether or not it is an out of time appeal.  I will post their decision when we receive it.  Ruth

There is a way round this is there was no change to the previous award (eg your client is getting income support and there is no rent increase)

Your client can apply for a supersession and there is a right of appeal against a refusal to supersede [See Wood v Secretary of State (reported as R(DLA)2/03) and R(IB)2/04 para 55]

The Commissioners in R(IB)2/04 held that a tribunal can substitute a revision for suopersesion and vice versa in appropritate cirumstances, and on that basis it would be arguable that the purported appeal can be treated as an application for supersession if there is no decision to appeal against.

You therefore have a somewhat tortuous route to the same end

Thanks, Stainsby, that is great.  Ruth