|
I've now got three cases with stays lifted now that R(H)3/04 has been issued.
As it happens, the LA that I am appealing against had such hopeless procedures on overpayments and recoveries that I feel it should be fairly easy to argue JR grounds. My problem is that I am of course a complete novice at JR arguements. In particular I have no knowledge of the authorities I need to cite to argue basic principles.
My arguements (based on the DM's evidence bundle)is that:
1.No actual decision on s75 (2) or (3) was actually made.
2.Recovery decision not notified (DM appears to confuse this with recoverability).
3. Actual recovery was made via an administrative procedure which defaults to recovery from landlord allowing LA to avoid making actual decision.
4. Evidence fails to show they followed any guidance.
I am ok making these arguements as assertions from the evidence and I can cite authoriy from commentary with sec 75, but I do not have any knowledge of other principles I should be including.
For instance I have seen reference in these forums to "wednesbury" test of reasonableness but I do not have the decision.
Can anyone help with this or any other JR principles?
|
