Scenario:

Cohabiting couple - one claiming IS as incapable of work for single person and one claiming JSA for single person.

IS claimant receives overpayment decision that overpaid full weekly amount because partner's JSA claim precludes her from entitlement to IS.

Is this correct or can any ofset be made of what would have received had they claimed correctly as a couple?

Presuming it wasn't contribution based JSA then they could they be in trouble.

There will be an IS overpayment. This cannot be offset by any JSA that would have been payable (reg 13 payments on account etc Regs), but may be offset by any IS that would have been paid if they can show entitlement as a couple, but that would still leave a similar situation with respect to the JSA.

However, they can ask the DWP to use its discretion to write off the amount that they would have been paid,, as not a true loss to the public purse, leaving a residual overpayment. They may expect an interview under caution, however.

Thanks for that.

I think I oversimplified this. Client had attended IUC in 2005 and attended Tribunal in 2006. Admitted LTAHAW for a certain period and Tribunal decided client had been overpaid between these dates. Calc of overpayment was left to DWP 'to be agreed between the parties'.

Client then received overpayment decision that full amount is repayable (in absence of agreement). Client has since left partner due to domestic violence and is obviously no longer in contact with them so we don't know whether partner has been slapped with overpayments of JSA as well.

Overall, won't there have been a loss to public purse because the sum total of JSA and IS for single people is more than the couple's rate of either of those benefits?

Yes there will but it won't be the full amount of the IS. The true loss will be the difference between 2 single person's rates and the couple rate. By recovering the IS in full then the DWP will only have paid out one single person's rate.

reet, get ya!

Cheers for that

It will be interesting to know if s71 is engaged, or s74 has been put in to issue. I guess if you do put in to issue in terms of the recovery, then there will be a wholly different completion on the case. See

http://www.osscsc.gov.uk/judgmentfiles/j1105/cis%205048%202002.doc