Forum Home → Discussion → Universal credit administration → Thread
Universal credit when abroad
I am currently disputing a decision of an over payment of UC for a client who was abroad following the sudden death of her father. She was away in Nepal and wasn’t able to tell UC until she came back. She was at the time also recovering from breast cancer surgery. This is a joint claim and her husband and children stayed in UK.
Regulation 11 (1) (a) and regulation 11 (2) (b) of the Universal credit Regulations 2013 allows for two month absence in exceptional circumstances such as a bereavement of a close relative. it seems to be at UC’s discretion to allow it.
She was away for 3 months and my question is do I have a case to argue that the over payment should only be for one month and they should allow the two months absence? That was the basis for my MR. This all happened a year ago.
We asked to be able to upload a MR via the journal and in their wisdom they just came back and said they had decided on the MR ( which we hadn’t yet requested) and the decision stands and the letter just says you were abroad for too long citing the regulations ( in summary) with nothing about the right of appeal etc ( which I am seeing a lot with UC)
We then uploaded the actual MR citing the regulations and have heard nothing more.
This year she went again for the anniversary of her fathers death to support her mum ( telling UC before her trip) and was away for a month. They have suspended all payment on the account.
Any advice on this would be grateful.
Pippa
You’re spot on.
I’d complete the appeal; their having decided the MR, with the full grounds as provided on MR#2.
You say “this all happened a year ago”; when was the MR completed by JCP? They probably think this is all resolved and boxed off having decided the MR and received no further appeal. You might be close to a deadline…
Thanks Dan, it will be a late appeal as the UC non MR response was on 1st July but we uploaded the actual MR on 10th July as it took a few days for UC to allow us to upload it .
We have had no response from that or from subsequent requests for a response.
The journal actually is full of messages that have not been responded to.
I have had enough and decided to do a late appeal on the non MR and let the tribunal service look at the whole mess and incompetence and confusion that is the UC Journal.
The upside is we have a log and printed it all in case the whole lot disappears over night!
Be careful to let HMCTS know that JCP have said that they’ve determined the MR.
Delays like these interest solicitors; there’s a big question over the propiety of the MR requirement where there are big delays in determining them. It’s a barrier to an effective right of appeal and a breach of art 6 ECHR.
Ok I will but will it be accepted if I am saying that JCP have determined an MR on something that didn’t exist . The only thing I can see is they treated a request to upload an MR as a MR.
Ok I will but will it be accepted if I am saying that JCP have determined an MR on something that didn’t exist . The only thing I can see is they treated a request to upload an MR as a MR.
Sec State can revise a decision at their own discretion. Maybe client phoned UC and inspired them to do the MR…
The Judiciary are alive to jiggery pokery around MRs in UC; I had an appeal accepted against a decision where JCP had actively refused to do the MR on the basis that JCP had considered it a few months back.
The decision that there’s a right of appeal where DWP refuse to accept late MR requests lays the principles down.
Let’s remember that notwithstanding the 23 uses of the word “MR” in this thread so far, no such thing exists.
There is a right of appeal if the SSWP has “considered on an application whether to revise the decision”. Neither the application nor the “consideration” need to take any particular form.
“MR” is a useful shorthand - but we mustn’t get hung up on imagined requirements for what formally amounts to an MR or an MRN. Your post says:
We asked to be able to upload a MR via the journal and in their wisdom they just came back and said they had decided on the MR ( which we hadn’t yet requested) and the decision stands
That sounds like consideration of an application to revise to me.
Fair enough but how can a decision be revised if the grounds have not been received?
However I understand your thoughts on MR and will be submitting a late appeal on the basis that UC didn’t revise the decision.
HELP.
So this same claimant went away to Nepal from 11th Sept-15th October. 2019 ( she told UC about this prior to going).
as it was the anniversary of her fathers death.
Yesterday she was told by UC that she was not entitled to universal credit from 24/08/19 which was the 1st day of the assessment period in which she left great Britain…she didn’t leave until 11th Sept…... It goes on that this is because she left GB for more than one month and the absence is not temporary.
Can anyone tell me where in the regulations 2013 UC regs 11about being abroad it states that they will count it back to the start of the assessment period which lengthens the stay away?
I currently have two appeals in for this claimant on two separate issues and wish to avoid a third.
Thanks
Pippa
Regulation 35(4) of the UC (Decisions and Appeals) Regs provides that any change of circumstances takes effect from the beginning of the assessment period
Thank you Daphne.
So if you go away for 4 weeks at the wrong time in the assessment period your UC could stop but if you go away for 4 weeks at the right time in the assessment period it wont stop. It seems crazy. Has this ever bee looked at in a tribunal?
Well I’m thinking she may be OK - because when she’s assessed on 23/10/19 she is in the UK and that change of circumstances should also apply from the start of that assessment period so should be paid in full for that one - so it might actually work in her favour as will only lose one month’s money.
Thanks again Daphne
The letter she has had is very unclear as it states that she doesn’t qualify and if she wants to make a new claim do it on it online!
However this is a joint claim and her husband didn’t travel with her.
I haven’t checked today if the claim is closed. I assume not.
This is an interesting case, as technically the legislation does not allow the claim to “remain open” for the husband as a single claim. Only where joint claimants “cease to be a couple” is there a rule that they can continue as single claimants without making a fresh claim. This being the case, they would have to make a fresh claim when she returns, and entitlement would be backdated to the start of the AP in which the claim is made.
It’s very likely though that DWP will treat this in the same way as a couple splitting and then reforming. If so, the claim would have been converted to a single claim for him from the start of the AP in which she left the country, and would then be converted to a joint claim from the start of the AP in which she returned.
If it would have been a single claim then the absence abroad would stop the 6 month rule operating, so she would lose more than one month’s worth - see reg 21(3C)(b)(i).