Claimant Commitment exemptions

Is there any point in appealing against a decision not to apply reg 16 (b) of the UC regs, or would it be outside of the Tribunal’s jurisdiction because it is a matter to be decided at the SoS’s discretion? In which case, would the only recourse be JR?

A reg 16 decision isn’t an entitlement decision so isn’t appealable of itself.

However if your client was refused uc on the basis that they did not sign a claimant commitment, you could appeal on the basis that reg 16 ought to have applied.

Thanks for your reply Elliot. He refused to sign the claimant commitment because he is training to represent the Country at the next Olympics and receives an Athlete Performance Award to support him and he does not believe that his training regime will allow him to look for and participate in employment. We have had a couple of similar cases in Bath. I have approached the DWP for clarification on this - I had assumed that because sports awards were detailed in reg 66 of the UC regs that they would have considered conditionality for this group of customers but the reply I have had suggests that there is no exception applicable and reg 16 b was only intended to be applied in emergency situations. They have also indicated that reg 16b may shortly be changed to clarify the policy intention, with an easement for the terminally ill.

I think the point of reg 16(b) is to cover a situation where the claimant couldn’t realistically have signed any sort of commitment. ADM gives examples of the job centre being on fire or the claimant needing to deal with a domestic emergency.

Your client’s challenge wouldn’t be on the grounds that he couldn’t reasonably sign a commitment - but rather on the grounds that he thought the commitment offered to him was unreasonable. I don’t think this is covered by reg 16(b).