UC LOBSTER POT?

Can anyone help me - this client is in a UC full service area - she was claiming ESA but this was ended after she failed assessment - due to her severe anxiety she doesn’t leave the house or answer the door to anyone she isn’t expecting; MR was done but no further action was taken for at least 3 months until I finally managed to make contact…
HB was originally suspended on 11/12/17 pending further information about her income.. she was unable to respond as her English isn’t great and relies on one person to assist her who travels once a month from Birmingham to see her in Halifax - claim was made for UC but it never went live as she failed to supply all available evidence as she didn’t understand what she had to do I’ve submitted a late appeal for the ESA to tribunal and appealed the decision to close the HB but this is their response

Hi Zoey
Having considered this case, I am of the opinion that this is a matter of pursuing the Universal Credit claim.
We were advised that Universal Credit was claimed in mid December but Ms S failed to supply all evidence necessary for the claim to be considered so it was closed down. Given that claim - and, in particular, the reasons why it was not successful - I am of the opinion that HB might not be awarded and that the Universal Credit claim should be pursued.
If you require me to refer this matter for adjudication, please let me know.

...considering that if she’s forced down the UC route she’ll lose out on any HB / HC element between December and now - do I have any legs to stand on to go down the adjudication route?
With regards to the late ESA appeal - tribunal have advised they are waiting for DWP to respond on whether to accept the reasons for the delay so ESA isn’t yet back in pymt..
any thoughts??

Reg 8 of the UC Transitional provisions Regs says that HB must end if UC is claimed by a person who satisfies the basic eligibility conditions other than the requirement to accept a claimant commitment.  There is no obvious reason to think that she does not satisfy those conditions.  I think there are only two possible ways back:

- the UC claim has yet to be formally decided, in which case it can be withdrawn and then, I believe, it is as if it never happened
- DWP took the view that her attempt to claim UC was inchoate - it didn’t pass muster as a claim at all.  This has been an issue when people fail to provide proof of ID; DWP just close the account and say “no proof of claimant’s existence = no claim”.

In either case, the decision ending HB could be revised as the conditions requiring HB to end do not arise after all.

So what it all hangs on is whether DWP accepts that she has submitted a claim and whether a decision has been made on that claim.  If it is yes to both, she is now unable to revert to HB.

well the first answer is yes - she made the claim but she failed to provide any proofs of ID or attend the initial apt so the claim was shut down as if it was never made so in that case there may be a way back ?

I have emailed the decision maker back and asked that the UC claim be treated as non effective - this is the response…

As I say, our information was that the claim did exist and was simply not followed up.

If you can supply something that says otherwise, I’ll consider it.

I presume I now need to chase up UC and see if they can provide anything?