Benefits office did not use the amount stated on my claim form

[JanD1960]

Basically I completed a claim form in July 2010 stating my earnings as £722 nett pay

As requested I enclosed my last two payslips which showed £626 nett pay (BR tax had been applied).

 

Benefits office calculated benefit on the amounts on the payslips, which I was unaware of until I recently received a copy of all paperwork.

 

I did not understand the award letter so assumed the calculations to be correct and made rent and CTax payment amounts as shown. Following award letters I treated the same- paying what I was told I had to pay.

 

After a benefit review in Dec 2012 I was told I owed over £2,600 housing benefit and over £880 in CTax benefit.

 

Bearing in mind my income in July 2010 was £722 nett and only reached the sum of £785 nett in Dec 2012 after a 3% payrise, I wondered how this huge amount of "overpayment" could have happened!

It is only now, after failed appeals and requesting a tribunal hearing that I understand how these amounts came about, that they used the payslip figures rather than the declared figure on the form. I know this now as I have copies of original claim etc.

 

I have been told that I should have spotted their error from the very first award letter which states "weekly income".

I understood the "weekly income" to be an amount that can be taken into account for benefit purposes and not literally my "weekly income".

 

I also hope to argue the "Notify us of any changes in CIRCUMSTANCES" statement at the bottom of letters as my circumstances had not changed - I was still only working two days a week and living in the same council flat. WHY don't they say "Changes in Income and/or circumstances"????

 

I am fully aware NOW that as my income increased, either because of a miniscule pay increase or annual budget tax code allowances being increased, I should have informed the benefits office.

 

Is there anyone out there think I have a chance of winning my appeal? or can advise me of how to present my case at the tribunal??

 

Please??

 

Jan

[tomtom256]

Its always calculated of the payslips as this figure is correct and people sometimes generalise their pay.

 

Why would your pay be different to whats on your payslips?

 

On your award letters it should show the income breakdown and gives you the chance to check it.

 

You could argue that they are at fault as per you initial claim, but the onus is on you to provide the info and check your award letters. They also normally advise you that you have to notify and changes in your circumstances to them.

 

The basic rule is that an overpayment has occurred and looking at regulations it is recoverable.

[estellyn]

Basically, for housing and council tax benefit 'official error' requirements, there is an additional clause that says that if you could reasonably have known that your award was incorrect - for instance details on your award letter are wrong, then it isn't counted as official error, and you are liable for the overpayment.

 

It is very difficult to show that the award letters are difficult to understand, as there were a flurry of cases a few years ago that won on that ground and so award letters were changed to make them easier to understand. 'Weekly income' is very hard to explain away as being understood to mean something else. Also the fact that you stated that your net income was £722 on the form, shows you were well aware of what your net income should be.

 

A change in income is widely accepted to be a change in circumstances.

 

Official error decisions on overpayments are very difficult to get for HB and CTB.

 

So I'm sorry, with the information you've given, I don't think you have a good chance of winning at appeal.

[JanD1960]

Thanks guys, I know I have a slim to NIL chance of winning this but feel I should at least try.

 

The reason the payslips were different to the amount on the form is because I had been made redundant from one job (the one where my tax allowance was used - the remaining job was at basic rate tax, hence the low nett pay).

 

I'll give it a go, it MAY help others who don't fully understand the system etc.

 

My additional argument is why bother with asking on a form if the information is disregarded?

 

All I wanted was a helping hand while I found more work, now I have found more work I'm landed with a £3,500 debt!!

 

It surely doesn't pay to be a hard working honest citizen

 

I'll post the result of the tribunal (which may not happen for a few months yet as I don't even have date!)

[estellyn]

Thanks guys, I know I have a slim to NIL chance of winning this but feel I should at least try.

 

The reason the payslips were different to the amount on the form is because I had been made redundant from one job (the one where my tax allowance was used - the remaining job was at basic rate tax, hence the low nett pay).

 

I'll give it a go, it MAY help others who don't fully understand the system etc.

 

My additional argument is why bother with asking on a form if the information is disregarded?

 

All I wanted was a helping hand while I found more work, now I have found more work I'm landed with a £3,500 debt!!

 

It surely doesn't pay to be a hard working honest citizen

 

I'll post the result of the tribunal (which may not happen for a few months yet as I don't even have date!)

 

The most important thing anyone can learn from this is to diligently check every single housing and council tax benefit award letter to make sure all of the information that you've provided is recorded correctly. If you're not sure - double check. I've seen so many overpayments due to people either not checking or thinking 'their error, their fault', which is not what the law says, unfortunately.

 

Every time my own award is reassessed, I have to get the award revised multiple times due to info on the award letter being wrong - worryingly, often including things that a layman wouldn't necessarily know about like applicable premiums.

 

If unsure, ALWAYS check.

[assisted blonde]

a change in income is a change of circumstance so I don't think that argument is going anywhere