Income support & Employment tribunal award

Hello all. I have a client who has been awarded 3K as an employment tribunal award, which has been paid into her bank account. Client has no previous savings or capial so this is all she has. Checked CPAG which says that if under 6K of capial then is ignored for means tested benefits. Client is under 60. Client adament that she has a friend who had an employement tribunal award for 3K as well, and that the benefits agency stopped her award until she spent the 3K.

Are there any rules to say that Employment tribunal awards should not be treated as capital and ignored if under 6K. client is on iS, CTC, HB and CTB.

There are now conflicting authorities on “compensation” awards.

Rather than set out all of the arguments, some of which are fact dependant, the following may (or may not) assist - bear in mind that the definition of “earnings” varies from benefit to benefit:

R(SB) 21/86
CJSA/0475/2009

In addition, there is a recent HB/CTB UTD - CH/3829/2008.  However, for what it’s worth, my view is this was wrongly decided and in all likelihood, there will be further authorities on this same point.

CH/2270/2009 - 2010 UKUT 234 AAC -has now been issued.
http://www.administrativeappeals.tribunals.gov.uk/aspx/view.aspx?id=3003

In my view, it puts it beyond doubt that equal pay settlements count as earnings.  Judge Howell expressly disagreed with the decision in CH/3829/2008.

Many thanks for all your help. Certainly more complex than I originally thought, as I was thinking only of capital and not income. Should have known that nothing in the welfare benefits system is straight forward.

Any updates on how these equal pay compensation awards are being treated in practice? The DMG Memo (31/10)  pushes the line taken by Jacobs in the most recent decision on equal pay awards, i.e. that they are to be treated as income/earnings and taken into account forwards from when they are received for the same period they cover. I assume this is the position that DWP and HB/CTB departments are taking when making decisions.

Has anyone had any success in arguing they should be treated as capital instead on the basis of the other UT decision (think that was an HB one - not sure if this means it carries less legal weight than the Jacobs decision as regards DWP benefits)?

We’re expecting enquiries next week as a lot of staff in Lancashire are getting offer letters.

Update.

Leave to appeal has been granted in both CJSA/0475/2009 & CH/2270/2009 - “Potter” and “Minter” respectively.  Current indications are for the Court of Appeal to hear these sometime in July.

Judgement now available:

Minter v Kingston Upon Hull City Council [2011] EWCA Civ 1155
(includes “Potter”).

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2011/1155.html

In short, the claimants’ appeals were unsuccessful.