I've had 2 such cases in the last month. DLA now seem to be informing HMRC - who then send out letters about the extra money. The problem being that instead of prmopting happiness with the increase it's leaving the claimants wondering why this wasn't done sooner. Both my cases had the disability element but no severe disability element.
The 1st person raised it along with a whole mountain of other issues (I'm only a generalist adviser...), and I just suggested he could return if he had any evidence that he'd told them at any point (and explained he could DPA them for all their information if necessary).
The 2nd person came in about only this issue. He got WFTC for 01/02 and 02/03, then switched to WTC/CTC. His daughter's had HRC DLA for the whole time. He believes he has _all_ paperwork for the last 15 years including all tax credit information, copies of forms, letters etc. He's also looking into it - which may be interesting. He's coming back if he finds any evidence he told them and it wasn't acted on, or that their information has been misleading and failed to ask.
I've checked one of the old forms/guidance notes (04/05 as that's what I had handy) and it certainly is explained, with a simple tick box on the form.
The problem is these client's aren't filling in the form every year. They're renewing by phone.
My 2nd client believes one of the older form asked for rates of DLA, which he answered correctly (though this may have been WFTC which had no severe disability premium). He also points out that the checklist now includes checking the rate of DLA specifically but he believes this was not always the case (I don't have an old one to check - but I do believe there have been additions).
It's interesting to try and work out exactly what information has been seen by those doing renewals only - and whether this has correctly reflected changes in the claiming process and the gradual improvement of forms and information. I also can't recall how they switched people from WFTC to CTC/WTC - though I was still an adviser back then.
I'm going to be very suprised if there is a case here - between the guidance, and the duty to check awards, and the change of circumstances lists etc.
I want to be at least partly positive that they're making sure this shouldn't be happening in future, but I can see why someone who has missed out for over 5 years might not see it like that.
I'm interested in how your case goes, and I suspect we'll all be seeing a lot of clients about this.
Victoria J Leytonstone CAB
|