I dont know if anyone has come across this but a client approached us appealing a capital and an overpayment decison. Client put both decision dates client was appealing against on the GL24. However, we have recieved the schedule with only an appeal against the overpayment. I have spoken to teh DWP regarding the matter and they have informed me that because the client did not actually indicate in the GL"$ that she does not have a certain amount of capital, they DWP will only accept the appeal against the overpatment recoveability. This does not make sense at all!! as far as i understand if the claient has put both decision dates on the GL24 then i would say she has appealed against them both. Does anyone have any suggestions because we have recieved the schedule for the overpayment recoverability but not the capital decision before it. The appeal is in 2 weeks. This is going to be pretty difficult because at this rate we can only argue against the recoeverability aspect not the capital decision.
As background the client basically had capital above £25,000 in her account but she is arguing that she was saving this for her daughter (who is over 18) because she struggles to save and the savings were also for her wedding. Unfortunately client has already mentioned in a statemnt to the DWP that her daughter gave her this money also as a security. Therefore, i would say it would be difficult to convince the tribunal that the money was not the clients.

thanks

hi salma

on the appeals issue -

by putting two dates on the GL24 your client has clearly indicated that she wishes to appeal against both decisions, and in fact the recovery decision is irrelevant if the disallowance on revision goes in her favour.
regulation 33 (1) (c) of D&Aregs states that the appeal should contain particulars of the grounds on which it is made - possibly this is what they are seizing on.

when an appeal is received which does not contain sufficient grounds, the appeals section will normally write to the Apellant and ask for grounds, explaining that without them the appeal is not valid - i think this action might be an instruction in their appeals guidance manual - not entirely sure - if Judith's around she might know...?

they should not simply ignore it, without communicating with the Appellant, and when it is the overpayment issue which your client wants the tribunal to consider, it seem particularly unhelpful, depending of course, on what your client actually did put in her appeal.

it's possible the tribunal would take a different view than the appeals officer - in the interests of her receiving a fair hearing, but they may well prefer to have a submission from the DWP on the capital issues.

i don't think there is anything to stop you from putting in a late appeal with grounds, referring to the earlier appeal and lack of communication until whenever it was that the DWP were treating it as invalid - i would be surprised if it would be ruled out for lateness, and to request postponement of the hearing, as the two appeals need to be heard together, and it would be a nonsense to hear the recovery appeal before the entitlement appeal...

Have you thought about writing to the tribunal service to request a postponement and directions for the DWP to produce a submission on the entitlement decision?

Does the body of her appeal actually address the substantive issue of whether there has been an overpayment? Eg "I don't think I ought to pay it back because it was for my daughter not me." If so a Tribunal can treat it as an appeal on both issues, becasue there is a right to deal with any issue raised in the appeal itself. The DWP doesn't always correctly identify what an appeal is really about from the claimant's point of view - like backdating jobseeker's allowance when the appeal is really about whether the previous claim was correctly closed for failure to keep an appointment.

If not they may still grant leave for a late appeal and adjourn for a supplementary submission.