Our L.A has today sent a large amount of invoices iro overpayments which occurred before April 2004.They have not previously notified us of these overpayments.When asked why the delay in notification, the reply was that there had been a problem with swopping from the old sundry debtor software to the new one and they and not realised that some invoices had not been issued.I asked whether claimants had been notified at the time of the overpayment and was told that they would have received a letter saying HB entitlement had changed which COULD indicate that there had been an overpayment.By the way the L.A never send us the full info re overpayments as detailed on schedule 6.
I know overpayments should be notified to affected persons within 14 days or as soon as reasonably practicable but in view of this situation, have we a right to refuse payment to the L.A?
Jeannette

If the LA has not issued schedule 6 compliant decision notices they have not actually made a valid decision that there has been an overpayment and you are not therefore liable to repay anything.

The LA can, of course remedy this by just issuing appropriate notices, but this gives you a right of appeal.

Can't advise on whether it is right to 'refuse payment' as that is a decision for you... However, the matter of the decision letters not complying with schedule 6 might be a weak argument, depending on how defective the notification letters are. See the case of Harringay LBC v Awaritefe 1999 32 HLR 517 which confirms that invalid notices can remain valid, even where they are otherwise not issued in accordance with schedule 6, (see also HB reg 77).

Again, the issue of lateness is one of degree... if the overpayments relate to the period between 1988 and for instance 1990 then yes, you have a very strong case to argue. If however they relate to say January to March 2004, then your position is much less certain, though TAS would not (and can not) make the overpayments non-recoverable just because they have been notified late. That remains the situation, even if the overpayments relate to 1988! Any LA presenting officer worth their salt will be able to trot out the LB Harringay case, though Article 6 might, just might, come into play (delay has prejudiced ability to hold a hearing within a reasonable time scale), but that argument is I think, a thin argument, based on what you have so far posted...

My advice would be to proceed on the same basis of whether you would challenge the recovery on the basis of the decisions being properly notified, and on time... but this advice rests on whether there are only minor defects in the letters, and the delay being not much before April 2004....

As for the delay, the Local Government Ombudsman will offer a partial solution to the delay, but I am uncertain if an RSL can make use of the LGO... you might however want your tenants to go down that route, as they are person’s affected in the decision to recover overpayments from you...

You might also want to explore the argument of whether you are an appropriate target for recovery.., see the arguments on the following thread...

http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=647&mesg_id=647&page=