The original appeals were against entitlement to I/S & therefore HB due to a LTAMW decision - JCP have now decided that I/S was paid but because of official error and nothing else - they are withdrawing from the I/S appeal - there has been a HB appeal awaiting as it were the result of the I/S appeal (it was originally a joint investigation) - technically, could the LA still go ahead with the HB appeal....?

Sorry - should have read

"JCP have now decided that I/S was overpaid but because of official error and nothing else, and as the decision is more favourable the appeal will not be sent to the Appeal service".

PS - Corby still had the front to write and ask if the client would like to voluntarily repay the overpayment.

How do man from the East?

Looks like two issues arise here. Firstly it has come to our attention in the Greater Manchester area that even though official error overpayments stand not to be subject to enforable recovery the DWP can of course seek repayment. The letter seeking such repayment MUST be responded to. We are told by the recovery unit that if no response is made to the effect that a person does not intend repaying the amount, the overpayment will remain on record and may, at some time in the distant future, generate further recovery action - no matter the official error.

The second issue is a little more throny though. I know that you are aware that HB regulations are far more stringent that the IS ones when it comes to recovery. As such, the mere offical error cannot sometimes be sufficient to prevent enforcable recovery. Serious consideration is given to whether or not the claimant has in any way contributed to the overpayment and whether they might have been expected to realise that too much benefit had been in payment. Certainly in this area Tribunals, Decision Makers and the like are often, in my opinion, over-zealous in pursuing recovery. So I think that the answer to your enquiry must be that recovery action for Housing and Council Tax Benefit may still be pursued by the Local Authority.

This one is relatively simple - HB was stopped when JCP arrived at a LTAMW decision and said claimant had wrongly claimed I/S - benefit stopped - HB followed suit - recovery action started by both parties - appeals lodged.

Some months later, out of the blue JCP say the I/S overpayment was down to official error and as such not recoverable - as decision was favourable to claimant JCP appeal papers would not be sent to Appeals service - end of appeal against I/s recovery etc.

To my mind, HB appeal should go the same way in that JCP have dropped their own accusation of LTAMW - and I/S wass paid throughout the whole period under scrutiny. Therefore HB was payable as well. HB section can't still say that they still hold that the claimant was LTAMW can they: their case was dependent on I/S case....

Make sense to anyone .....

Not sure I agree at all. Just because JCP decide it is not recoverable because of official error, does not mean there was no OP or that claimant was entitled to the IS. The Hb OP is still potentially open to pursue. Unless if course you are saying they have gone back to revise their decision and decided that the claimant was entitled to IS afterall, in which case the HB should follow suit if their OP decision was based purely on the withdrawal of IS.

The HB decision was solely based upon the withdrawal of I/S for the relavent period.......One of the things I have'nt yet got to the bottom of is how they (I/S) went from a LTAMW decision to an official error - client was a single parent throughout the period in question and has never admitted to being anything else.