Forum Home → Discussion → Benefits for older people → Thread
backdated sdp
would appreciate any opinions on this. i posted on this case earlier but things have changed since then.
time line for the case is this:
1. client awarded middle rate care dla. no sdp at this point as she has a partner and an adult non dep.
2. partner moves out and she claims pgc. no sdp as adult non dep still there
3. adult non dep moves out (i will come to notification later)
4. sdp not added until i become involved years later, notice this and correct it.
based on the previous thread here http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/6479/
i think my only argument is to argue the change in circs was notified.
Case going to appeal and in the bundle of papers the pension service deny change was notified. from papers though a pc2 form is noted as being requested and filled in at the time the adult non dep moves out. Pension service argue that if they had got the pc2 and it told them of the change in circs they would have acted on it.
I done a direction notice request to get a copy of the pc2 but surprise surprise its gone missing.
My intention is to argue that “on the balance of probability” the pc2 form did notify the change and therefore the pension service made an official error and that this allows the decision not to award the sdp to be revised under reg 3 (5)(a) of the 1999 decision and appeal regs.
Am i right in thinking this? the review/supersession thing ties me in knots at times so i want to make sure i am not missing anything.
Sounds good to me Steve. In my experience, the PS has a habit of not including significant/vital docs in the bundle (and then proving to have ‘lost’ the docs concerned). Your client can’t prove the change in circs was notified but the PS can’t prove it wasn’t, and the circumstantial evidence of the PC2 makes it more than likely to my mind that the change was notified. As long as the client is credible I think the appeal stands a very reasonable prospect of success.
Sounds good to me Steve. In my experience, the PS has a habit of not including significant/vital docs in the bundle (and then proving to have ‘lost’ the docs concerned). Your client can’t prove the change in circs was notified but the PS can’t prove it wasn’t, and the circumstantial evidence of the PC2 makes it more than likely to my mind that the change was notified. As long as the client is credible I think the appeal stands a very reasonable prospect of success.
funnily enough i warned the client i had a suspicion it would disappear.
they did give me a laugh though as the first part of the reponse has a speel about how it should be assumed a public body hasnt made a mistake and that the dwp would never not act on information given by a claimant only for a page or two later to have to say…..eh we lost the form.
they need a department for self awareness in there.
I’ve seen a few like that- in fact, the comment about it should be assumed public bodies don’t make mistakes sounds identical (must be one of the cut & paste standard paragraphs I think). It’s such a shame because when they were first in existence the PS was one of the nicest Government agencies to deal with. These days they’re almost as Kafkaesque and difficult as HMRC.
Good luck with it- do let us know what the outcome is.