Hi all,

Our association appealed against recovery of a HBOP from us on the grounds we were unaware of the change in circumstance that the claimant had. It is evident that the DWP was seriously late notifying the LA of the change, and as usual the claimant did not.

There was obviously quite a bit of correspondence with the LA to build our case for appeal.

The claimant then became entitled to HB again and the LA decided to recover from on-going HB under installment recovery procedure.

We therefore accepted this result as the LA had clarified the position of our appeal. We have now recieved new notifications of the original HBOP's and again the LA are seeking recovery from us as we recieved the incorrect payments. We are now presuming that the claimant has again become un-entitled to HB, hence again seeking recovery from us.

The main question is: Do we treat this as a new case i.e. ask for a statement of reasons, then seek a review of their decision, then appeal.

Or: As we already have the facts of the case and appealed already against these HBOP's, go straight to appeal and request an appeal hearing?

Your thoughts would be most appreciated.

I never bother with statements of reasons, review and appeal. I always go straight to appeal even 1st time round.

I do this because statements of reasons are often inadequate and you might as well wait for the submission then decide what you want to do

Good point i suppose, saves a lot of time. But wouldn't that limit your options when going to the appeal hearing? You wouldn't have the LA's sometimes annoying Reg quoting responses where they haven't told you anything about the actual case.

Back to the main point, on the above case, do you suggest to go to straight appeal as we have all the reponses from the LA or request them again to make it official as they may not be used in the TAS submission i.e. it is a new case as new HBOP notifications have been issued and the LA wouldn't use old correspondence?

I dont find it limits my options at all because I insist that everything relvant is included in the submission. I also assert the right of appeal agaisnt every aspect of the outcome overpayment decision.

That includes the grounds for the supersession that led to the overpayment.

I always produce a written counter submission before the hearing if I decide to take it that far.

I found that once I had done enough of them I had a collection of templates to use in future cases, and similarly I have a collection of standard appeal letters