Was B wrong?

However… B was about a person’s inability to understand a fact of which they were aware was material to their benefit entitlement and thus needed to be disclosed.

The position I posit is about a person who is arguably unable to make the disclosure. Martin’s “as soon as you can” and Ariadne’s point have some merit once that thought crystallises properly.

I might have a solution as well… reg 7(1)(c)(ii) D&A regs; the supersession takes effect from when the claimant failed to notify an appropriate office of a change of circumstances and knew, or could reasonably have been expected to know that the change of circs should have been notified.

Knowing that the Judiciary are probably watching this I may wish I’d kept my metaphorical gob shut, however I’d appreciate people’s thoughts…