Forum Home → Discussion → Decision making and appeals → Thread
DWP fail to implement Tribunal Decision
Correct. The issue was “notional” capital.
I appreciate this is a brief summary of the case, but how did the tribunal get past B v SSWP?
If the alleged overpayment was as a consequence of notional as opposed to actual capital, then B would not be a hurdle - and a claimant’s capacity would be entirely relevant.
Perhaps that’s the explanation?
I am not sure I understand where you are coming from . Notional capital in this case derives from there having been actual capital at some point, which is no longer possessed by the person. There is no requirement to disclose notional capital, only actual capital (understandably) .
I appreciate this is a side issue to the initial query, so apologies to the original post, it was just a matter of interest
You asked Benny how he was going to get past B?
I was saying that B is relevant only if any alleged overpayment arose at the point whilst the claimant still possessed the capital - because it’s about whether a person’s lack of mental capacity can displace their legal obligation to disclose a change of circumstances or material fact.
But if the overpayment relates entirely to alleged notional capital (i.e. the overpayment period is confined to a time after they’d disposed of it) then the issues are whether the claimant was aware of the capital limits, what their purpose was when disposing and whether (if they have mental health problems) they could properly said to have even been in control of their spending - and a claimant’s mental capacity is relevant to those issues. And because there was no claim at the point of the disposal, B isn’t a problem - there was nothing to disclose.
To return to the point; DWP are still apparently arguing amongst themselves as to who is actually responsible for actioning the Tribunal’s decision. Result is that our client is still not receiving her entitlement while the buck merrily circulates from one DWP department to another.
Meanwhile, client is blaming us…...........!
Meanwhile, client is blaming us…...........!
I’ve been on the receiving end of very similar stuff before Benny, it’s really not a happy situation to find yourself in is it? I think we needed to get MP involved in the end to resolve and even then, client came back and said “Why couldn’t you do what he’s done?” even though we’d suggested the MP in the first place.
We already involved the MP, who, being of the new intake, merely regurgitated the DWP official line to us.
Doesn’t it drive you mad when they do that?