× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Work capability issues and ESA  →  Thread

PIP award and backdated SDP

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 3196

Joined: 7 January 2016

Having a senior moment here.

Client awarded higher rate of PIP and thus entitled to SDP.

Only receives contributory ESA and asks for backdating of income-related ESA to date of increased PIP award under anytime revision request. Entitlement to ir-ESA only possible with SDP.

DWP refuse as only getting c-ESA.

Do they have to have been entitled to ir-ESA covering date of increased PIP award for this to work? If DWP correct, what to do instead?

Thanks :-)

BC Welfare Rights
forum member

The Brunswick Centre, Kirklees & Calderdale

Send message

Total Posts: 1366

Joined: 22 July 2013

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/260187/response/640951/attach/2/FoI 1176.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1 is the DWP view of this situation but I can’t quite get my head around it with ESA being one benefit. It does not seem to fit with what it is saying.

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 3196

Joined: 7 January 2016

Thanks, this is my dilemma in a nutshell and can’t get my head around it.

Hopefully a night’s sleep might aid thinking.

HB Anorak
forum member

Benefits consultant/trainer - hbanorak.co.uk, East London

Send message

Total Posts: 2895

Joined: 12 March 2013

Seems clear enough to me. The final paragraph is saying yes we will do it as an any time superseding decision, acknowledging that ESA is one benefit.  That’s how I read it.

BC Welfare Rights
forum member

The Brunswick Centre, Kirklees & Calderdale

Send message

Total Posts: 1366

Joined: 22 July 2013

That makes sense Anorak. If they can backdate the EDP they can backdate the SDP.

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 3196

Joined: 7 January 2016

HB Anorak - 20 November 2018 07:31 PM

Seems clear enough to me. The final paragraph is saying yes we will do it as an any time superseding decision, acknowledging that ESA is one benefit.  That’s how I read it.

Thanks Peter, that’s what I was thinking but something wasn’t adding up. Let’s see what happens next.

tony pickering
forum member

Welfare rights officer - Derbyshire County Council, High Peak

Send message

Total Posts: 108

Joined: 16 June 2010

Hello Paul

I had a similar situation the other day and had the same senior moment as you.  I came across this UT decision which seems to cover it, in case you need it: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5ae2d53ced915d42f7c6bac2/CE_3532_2017-00.pdf

Tony

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 3196

Joined: 7 January 2016

Nice one Tony, thanks very much for this. I do believe that the claimant’s rep in this case might be another welf from these very boards as well.