Changes of circumstances

Reg 20 of the draft Decisions and Appeals regs says a change runs from first day of the assessment period (AP) it occurred
Regs 21 and 22 say that apart from earnings changes and changes relating to arrival/departure etc of another benefit, late reports of advantageous changes run from first day of AP of notification
Reg 23 and 24 suggest that in relation to a LCW change, where claimant failed to notify on time and could reasonably have known better, the change runs from start of AP when they should have known better. Unlike Reg 25 (which solely refers to a negative change in relation to LCW), Reg 23 does not specifically say it relates to only positive or negative changes.

I am confused about the relationship between Reg 21 and 23. A person is getting UC and later attains LCW status, but fails to report within the first AP. This is a positive change, so Reg 21 starts by saying the change clicks in from start of AP of notification. But Reg 23 says if claimant should have known better, the change should (via Reg 24) run from start of AP when claimant should have known better, which means claimant gets more arrears. Q Is that right? Going round in circles here.

I do hope I am not embarrassing myself because an obvious misreading!

I am going to hazard an answer, which is probably stupid, but here goes!

LCW can only be decided by a decision maker or tribunal. Therefore a claimant couldnt know if they were assessed as having LCW until a decision was made by someone in authority. A Decision Maker has to decide what date it is payable from as does a Tribunal. So arrears must be payable from that date.

Therefore if the decision reaches the client in the middle of an AP, then it should reach the DWP at the same time. Whilst it is sensible for the claimant to remind the DWP, the claimant couldnt reasonably know that the arrears werent going to be paid until the following month. At that point, they have acted reasonably in raising the point if on pay day the monies arent there. They couldnt know for sure if arrears are there until it is paid.

I think that the interpretation would be that if the claimant knew they should recieve LCW based on a decision issued, and did not challenge the obligations incorrectly made, or the shortfall in income recieved then backdating would be reduced.

As said, I am probably reading the question wrongly, and interpreting the regulations wrongly, but hopefully it will trigger someone more knowledgeable to clarify.

In my view the structure of part 3 of schedule 1 is as follows.

The starting point is that all claimant notifications of coc’s take effect from the beginning of the assessment period in which the change takes place (para 20).  However, para 20 is subject to the exceptions laid out in the rest of part 3.  Apart from changes in earnings and awards of other relevant benefits (paras 22 and 31) late notifications of coc’s take effect from the beginning of the AP in which they are notified (para 21).

But notifications of coc’s which relate to limited capability for work determinations are themselves subject to further qualification.  Para 23 seems to me to be neutral and can operate to the benefit or detriment of the claimant where it was reasonable for the claimant to know he should have notified a change he was lawfully obliged to notify.  Thus it allows for the superseding decision to take effect from the first day of the AP in which the change occurred rather than any later notification (para 24). 

Para 25 seems to operate as a no fault provision for coc’s in relation to LCFW determinations where it was not reasonable for the claimant to know he should have notified a change he was lawfully obliged to notify.  It allows for the “the superseding decision” to take “effect on the first day of the assessment period in which the Secretary of State makes that decision” in cases where the superseding decision is not advantageous to the claimant

Finally, in all other cases, where the Secretary of State acts on his own initiative in applying for supersession, apart from cases falling within paras, 26, 27 and 28, the new decision takes effect from “first day of the assessment period in which the Secretary of State commenced action with a view to supersession” (para 29) .