Forum Home → Discussion → Benefits for older people → Thread
Joint Claim PC - Overpayment, who is liable?
Morning all!
I’m just after a bit of advice. I’m dealing with a client who is seperated from her ex-husband. Cl had a joint claim for pension credits whilst they were together and her husband began to work and they failed to disclose a change of circs regarding income. There is no argument that the overpayment is correct.
However, what I would like to know is, who can the DWP pursue for the debt? When I spoke to them, they said that they will only pursue the person who’s NI number is displayed on the bank statement when the benefit is paid as it is their claim. I was under the impression that a joint claim is a joint claim regardless of who is paid pension credits.
Has anyone tried to argue beneficial interest in that the ex-husband also used some of the money and therefore he should also be liable for the overpayment? Has anyone come across a similar situation? Any tactics gratefully received.
I didn’t know that PCg was a joint claim?
I always thought that it was a benefit that one had to claim for the other rather than jointly as is Tax Credits.
After reading through Cpag John, it seems you are right!
Morning all!
I’m just after a bit of advice. I’m dealing with a client who is seperated from her ex-husband. Cl had a joint claim for pension credits whilst they were together and her husband began to work and they failed to disclose a change of circs regarding income. There is no argument that the overpayment is correct.
However, what I would like to know is, who can the DWP pursue for the debt? When I spoke to them, they said that they will only pursue the person who’s NI number is displayed on the bank statement when the benefit is paid as it is their claim. I was under the impression that a joint claim is a joint claim regardless of who is paid pension credits.
Has anyone tried to argue beneficial interest in that the ex-husband also used some of the money and therefore he should also be liable for the overpayment? Has anyone come across a similar situation? Any tactics gratefully received.
I note that you say that the ” overpayment is correct” . However the overpayment may still not be recoverable if there has not been a legally effective and valid decision on entitlement. Without this there will be no recoverable overpayment. Please see section 71(5A) of The Social Security Adminstration Act 1992.
There is no argument that the overpayment is correct.
Given the frequency of errors made by DWP overpayment cases, I would not be so sure that the amount is correct.
It is strongly advisable to appeal all overpayments in order to protect the client’s position.
However, you can only advise accordingly.
The decision is up to the client. Even if you don’t like their decision.
However, you can only advise accordingly.
The decision is up to the client. Even if you don’t like their decision.
Equally an adviser can refuse to act for a client when their advice is not accepted.
Presumably client in this case is not pleased about having to repy which is why they have asked for advice.
However, you can only advise accordingly.
The decision is up to the client. Even if you don’t like their decision.
Equally an adviser can refuse to act for a client when their advice is not accepted.
Presumably client in this case is not pleased about having to repy which is why they have asked for advice.
It must be an odd situation where an appeal is driven by the adviser on threat of withdrawl if the appellant doesn’t comply.
There are reasons to withdraw sometimes, but that would mainly be on a credibility issue. Usually.
Anyway. Contrariness aside, from reading the original post it seems the client agreed there was an overpayment but was looking for at least a joint liability. The circumstances given were that the party whom was the root cause of the OP was not liable for the debt but was included in the claim and benefited from the same. Which seemed unfair.
.
It must be an odd situation where an appeal is driven by the adviser on threat of withdrawl if the appellant doesn’t comply.
.
Yes it would be an odd situation but no one has suggested “threatening ” anything.
.
It must be an odd situation where an appeal is driven by the adviser on threat of withdrawl if the appellant doesn’t comply.
.
Yes it would be an odd situation but no one has suggested “threatening ” anything.
you definitely want the last word on this one don’t you?
.
It must be an odd situation where an appeal is driven by the adviser on threat of withdrawl if the appellant doesn’t comply.
.
Yes it would be an odd situation but no one has suggested “threatening ” anything.
you definitely want the last word on this one don’t you?
No fellas : I do!
I’m Spartacus!
LOL!!!