If this is your first visit, check out the community guide. You will have to Join us or Sign in before you can post.

DWP "stop" legacy benefits when a new UC claim is submitted but POI not completed.

MagnoliabloomMagnoliabloom Posts: 29Member Listener
edited January 9 in Universal Credit
Have asked for mandatory consideration (MR) of child tax credit  (CTC) termination which was initiated by DWP when a new claim for UC was commenced but not completed.  NO COMMITIMENT and NO POOF OF IDENTITY  were made.
Decided worse off on UC and hassle much too much.  UC being rolled out in my area so no prospect of making new CTC claim.
CTC  award confirmed as ended by DWP and TC office.
Universal credit ( transitional Provisions )  Regulations  2014 section 8 (1)to (d) are not met in this claim and we believe that existing benefits (TC) should not have been terminated.
Benefit advisor or other , what is your view please ? This situation has not been tested at Tribunal we believe ?
Long wait for MR any other option ? will go the tribunal if MR fails.

Thank you.

Replies

  • BenefitsTrainingCoBenefitsTrainingCo Posts: 2,658Member Pioneering
    Hello Magnoliabloom

    What were the circumstances in which UC was claimed? Were you entitled to CTC, but made a UC claim by mistake?  Have you received just one decision from HMRC stopping benefit? Please note that you may also receive a final end of year Tax Credit decision letter that you may also have to challenge. Finally, did UC ever make a decision on entitlement?

    You detailed Universal credit ( transitional Provisions )  Regulations  2014 section 8 (1)to (d), and in particular:

    Termination of awards of certain existing benefits: other claimants

    8.—(1) This regulation applies where—

    (a)a claim for universal credit (other than a claim which is treated, in accordance with regulation 9(8) of the Claims and Payments Regulations, as having been made) is made; and

    (b)the Secretary of State is satisfied that the claimant meets the basic conditions specified in section 4(1)(a) to (d) of the Act (other than any of those conditions which the claimant is not required to meet by virtue of regulations under section 4(2) of the Act).

    The basic conditions of entitlement referred to above relate to:
    (a) is at least 18 years old, 
    (b) has not reached the qualifying age for state pension credit, 
    (c) is in Great Britain, 
    (d) is not receiving education

    Given the above conditions even if a claimant commitment is not signed the basic conditions of UC entitlement may still be satisfied.

    Even if proof of identity is not supplied, it maybe that if the questions on the online form are answered and you can post on your online UC journal, a valid claim has been made. 

    A lot however has still to be clarified on valid UC claims, and so definite advice cannot be given on this issue.  It is worth bearing in mind that if your challenge is not successful then benefit entitlement will be lost for this period. 

    The below link is for case CTC/1276/2018 which considers the Secretary of State issues a stop notice to Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, with the claimant later withdrawing the claim; the nature of withdrawal and whether retrospective in effect.

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5bbc5a0eed915d23a6b835eb/CTC_1276_2018-01.pdf 

    Good luck

    Maria
    The Benefits Training Co:
    Paul Bradley
    Michael Chambers
    Will Hadwen
    Sarah Hayle
    Maria Solomon
    David Stickland
  • mikehughescqmikehughescq Posts: 3,353Member - under moderation Disability Gamechanger
  • MagnoliabloomMagnoliabloom Posts: 29Member Listener
    Thank you.
    The claim was made because the claimant thought that she would be entitled to housing benefit. She applied to the local council online but their web page was out of date and they later informed her to apply for UC which had been rolled out recently. . The claimant was not aware of the "stop" rule for existing benefits and in that sense made claim by mistake not knowing the risks . Claimant has serious disability.
    We have looked at transitional arrangements 2014. Our point is that a to d were not met because the claimant did not confirm her identity.Therefore the Sec of state could not be satisfied that a to d were met. We believe that whatever the claimant enters on a form this does not "prove" identity otherwise why are further checks are needed ?
    DWP closed the claim presumably because the POI was not made.  We have looked at both the cases in your links and while similar they are not exactly the same.
    We understand that benefit for the period is being lost.  The legacy benefit is child tax credit .   A telephone call to UC confirmed that they had closed the claim.
    Any further advise is valued. We intend to go forward if MR is not successful as this needs to be tested and is grossly unfair. UC is harsh and does not take account of disabled/vulnerable persons particular position. While the claimant eventually will have to migrate to UC this may be years yet and she wants to avoid it having had a bit of experience of it.
  • MagnoliabloomMagnoliabloom Posts: 29Member Listener
    Benefits trading company-  Sorry to answer more fully .
    The child tax credit was in payment yes. There was an award in payment.
    Yes claimant received one letter only ending the CTC claim. On telephone enquiry to tax credits they insisted on ending claim as told to by UC.  We have appealed this with MR request.
    UC did not award UC but wrote claim closed on journal.  No decision made on benefit.
     The date of UC application was same date that UC closure of the claim .
    Child tax credit was ended the day before the claim- these are the regulations I think.

  • MagnoliabloomMagnoliabloom Posts: 29Member Listener
    Benefits trading company.
    Just informed that a final tax credits decision received by claimant . claim was ended the day before UC application.
    Should MR this I presume ?

  • mikehughescqmikehughescq Posts: 3,353Member - under moderation Disability Gamechanger
    Your UC team will have an escalation route for all advice services. You need to get face to face advice and ask for the case to be escalated to a partnership manager. I am aware of at lease one case near identical to this where DWP simply caved, regardless of what the law says, and reinstated legacy benefits. 
  • MagnoliabloomMagnoliabloom Posts: 29Member Listener
    Mike Thank you for trying to help us.
    We are determined to assist our  disabled family member (FM) but the FM lives hundreds of miles away and my local citizens advice cannot help me as claimant is out of area.
    I am willing to ask UC to escalate for advice services but I thought we needed independent advice ?
    Please confirm what is a partnership manager ?
    At the end of the day I am willing to pay for a skilled advice session  if necessary to see this through.
    UC closed the UC claim without giving a reason and the reason is likely to be that
    POI and commitment were not done . 


  • mikehughescqmikehughescq Posts: 3,353Member - under moderation Disability Gamechanger
    You should not need to pay for advice. Plenty of free competent advice about. 

    You’re not asking UC to escalate. You’re getting an advice service to use the escalation route which is exclusively for advice services. That’s usually to the UC partnership mansger. Posh words for what’s essentially a DWP liaison officer i.e. don’t know much about the techy side of UC but work closely with partner organisations and very anxious to sort issues to avoid bad publicity. 

    Try https://advicelocal.uk/ to find someone near your family member. 
  • MagnoliabloomMagnoliabloom Posts: 29Member Listener
    Thank you for your prompt reply, we understand now the role if a partnership manager.
    We will try to move forward in the way you suggest.
    We have  also had some contact with the claimants MP ,do you think she could suggest to DWP that they look at this again ? Could this be helpful ?
    Thank you and we will let you know the outcome in this difficult situation

  • mikehughescqmikehughescq Posts: 3,353Member - under moderation Disability Gamechanger
    I have no idea why people place their faith in MPs. There’s a process in place. Use the process.
  • MagnoliabloomMagnoliabloom Posts: 29Member Listener
    OK thank you. We will get back to you with an outcome.  Why disabled claimants should have to go through this I have no idea but many thanks again.
  • MagnoliabloomMagnoliabloom Posts: 29Member Listener
    Up date on the above. MR - HMRC have not changed the decision. We have obtained  a tribunal form and know the timescale. My FM lives in London. My FM is unwell  and disabled so while in London with her I saw a benefits advisor who phoned DWP at my request and asked for the escalation route because of financial hardship. This was refused with the comment that there is no live claim (true).  Is this a script to prevent us getting help ? Can DWP refuse this request through an advice service ?
    What can we do now ? We are going forward with tribunal and know the timescale.  The advice service will get us legal representation.
    Thank you.
  • MagnoliabloomMagnoliabloom Posts: 29Member Listener
    Stop of legacy benefits at time of UC claim.
    Tribunal request accepted and will take 38 weeks to be heard.  In response  HMRC focus on Regulation 8 which they say was correctly applied although primary claimant did not prove identity.  HMRC in their response to tribunal application show a copy of "stop notice" to one of the joint claimants but not to the primary claimant ( clearly failure to prove identity in primary applicant does not result in a stop notice.)
    HMRC in response to tribunal request show no documentation to demonstrate that the "complex needs" of primary applicant were considered before stop notice was sent nor do they show that at MR they considered the complex needs of the claimant. At no stage did they consider the complex needs.  There was no safeguarding This failure  to consider complex needs forms part of the tribunal case from our angle. HMRC quote the Judge Jacobs upper tribunal case - the one and only outcome of the testing of Reg 8. This appears to the only case in which reg 8 has been tested.  The claimant lost the case.   Our case  differs in some respects.
    Advisors - do you have any advise or comment please ?
  • MagnoliabloomMagnoliabloom Posts: 29Member Listener
    Mike Hughes - thanks again for advice.  attended a benefits adviser and he contacted advisor line at DWP but they refused the escalation route as they stated that at this time there is no claim (UC claim was close by DWP). He contacted  HMRC and they state that they have no escalation route.   Progressed to tribunal against HMRC as above.
Sign in or join us to comment.