Forum Home → Discussion → Universal credit migration → Thread
DWP concedes new ‘transitional protection’ judicial review
From Garden Court North Chambers:
A couple who lost £10,000 on transferring to Universal Credit are to receive full compensation for their past and future loss, following a successful judicial review.
This case may be important for anyone who lost money on transferring to UC between January 2019 and January 2021 and who was entitled to an SDP at the date of transfer, even if that entitlement was only decided afterwards. A person in that position should seek legal advice on whether they too would have grounds for judicial review.
Great work from Tom Royston and Southwark Law Centre.
Maybe a DWP cost benefit analysis on this one suggested settling those that go for JR rather than lose in court again and have to do another trawl though the cases? Which, from what we know about the way UC is administered, might be impossible for the DWP to do.
We’ve had a number of clients who retrospectively should have been getting SDP and we’ve not had a problem getting TSDPP once the SDP arrears have been put in place
I have a client who’s rather in limbo. We rung round a few solicitors during lockdown but she couldn’t get a solicitor to take on a similar JR. Instead we’ve ended up appealing the termination of her ir-ESA on the basis the SDP is now in place so it should be a retrospective gateway. Unfortunately it keeps getting adjourned and no one seems to want to make a ruling, which is the worst case scenario for her economically.
I would like to see if the DWP will offer a UC reinstatement on the terms given here in return for withdrawing the appeal. Any ideas who I could approach?
Does anyone know the background to the Deadman and Ryan case? Did they make their claim for UC between January 2019 and July 2019 (before Transitional SDP Payments were introduced)? So their argument was based on no transitional protection at all? Thanks
Reading the summary on GCN Chambers website on the link, they claimed after 16 January 2019 at the point where they would have been prevented from claiming UC had they had an SDP.
They later gained a entitlement to SDP which went back to or before that date of claim. And from the wording they received full compensation for their loss. Which distinguishes the case from someone receiving TSDPE which does not provide full compensation?
That’s how it seems on reading it
We’ve had a number of clients who retrospectively should have been getting SDP and we’ve not had a problem getting TSDPP once the SDP arrears have been put in place
Bump
I suspect I’ve got one of these so I’ve been hunting for this case (and I didn’t dream it… yay!)
Has anyone any experience in England of getting SDP arrears on a closed ESA claim and/or securing the SDPTE on UC? I haven’t got full instructions yet but reading through correspondence the tone seems to be “if you weren’t in receipt of SDP we’re not paying the transitional element”
I’m curious what process JCP went through to put the SDP onto the ESA award, hints and tips appreciated.
We’ve had a number of clients who retrospectively should have been getting SDP and we’ve not had a problem getting TSDPP once the SDP arrears have been put in place
Bump
I suspect I’ve got one of these so I’ve been hunting for this case (and I didn’t dream it… yay!)
Has anyone any experience in England of getting SDP arrears on a closed ESA claim and/or securing the SDPTE on UC? I haven’t got full instructions yet but reading through correspondence the tone seems to be “if you weren’t in receipt of SDP we’re not paying the transitional element”
I’m curious what process JCP went through to put the SDP onto the ESA award, hints and tips appreciated.
Bump again.
The tone certainly was “if you weren’t getting SDP…” and it’s at appeal now. I’ve finally managed to get an IS10 done for the old ESa claim and I’m sure I’ve seen comment on people getting the retro SDP paid but I cannae find it. Any guidance would be welcome.