There is a more recent decision that starts to find differently to CH/0069/2003, but then finds against the clmt anyway (sorry, can't locate the ref for now).
In the "other" CD, the facts meant the Cmmr distinguished it from CH/0069 and decided that the LA should have spotted the income on the bank statement(s). HOWEVER, the Cmmr then went on to find that, in any case, the clmt contributed to the LA mistake by not disclosing the income on the claim form AND that the clmt could reasonably have been expected to be aware s/he was being overpaid. All of which meant the o/p was recoverable in any case.
Whenever a clmt fails to disclose info on a claim form (assuming the question was asked), LAs will be successful in such cases on the vast majority of occasions.
|