This scenario used come up a lot when i worked for NHS Mental Health Trusts (99% of the time it would be revised in favour of the client, once i can remember it going to a tribunal at Sutton and a PO was there, and we barely got our bums on the seat and i was backout waiting on the platform at Sutton station waiting for the next train to East Croydon (me, the PO and the chair at the hearing, the client was not allowed out of the PICU), and the chair announced the PO agreed it should be backdated.
It came up recently at an appeal hearing relating to the post i posted concerning Lodger or adult non-dependent (2 appeals heard together i.e. lodger blah blah and backdating). The backdating appeal was lodged 7 months after the day of the decision and we were asking for it to be backdated for a period of 8 weeks. The tribunal (District chair) allowed both appeals.
What i was suggesting was appealing the decision awarding IS on the basis of asking the award to be backdating for 12 weeks from the date the claim was made. I.e. claim treated as made on the e.g. 14th Dec, decision made 14th Jan, appeal decision 14th Jan asking for IS to be backdated 12 weeks from 14th Dec. Yes it is technically extending the period for making a claim etc etc, in the same way as a late appeal.
Its one of those scenario's that crept up again and again working for Mental Health trusts so it becomes one of those empirical issues that becomes engrained in my tiny welfish brain, and i think i just blundered into it as part of maximising clients income.
Honest, esteemed Uber learned welfs that you Paul and Ariadne are, he nods, bows and curtseys respectfully (which i wouldn't do for monarchy etc all the while suppressing his feelings of inferiority and not to mention existential angst), but it is really is that simple.
see ya andy
|