Arrears of IS Premiums

I think you should be able to ask for a supersession on the IS claim, from the date that the PIP came into payment, using the following regs:

Regulation 6(2)(e) of the Social Security and Child Support (Decisions and Appeals) Regs 1999, which allows for a supersession when a ‘relevant benefit’ comes into payment;

Regulation 7 of the same regs, which states that a ‘decision which is superseded in accordance with regulation 6(2)(e)...shall be superseded… from the date on which entitlement arises to the other relevant benefit’

So I think that should get your client the premiums from the date that PIP entitlement arose.

Don’t quote me on that though.

Cheers

Alex

This should help see paras 26-27

26. However, as I understand it, the point that Ms Tilt was trying to make was that the making of a decision that a claimant is entitled to a benefit over a specific period of
time is not itself a material change of circumstances for the purposes of section 12(8)(b) and regulation 3(9)(a) in a case like this; rather, the decision is declaratory of
a state of affairs that is to be taken as always having existed throughout that period.  The beginning (and end, if any) of that period would have marked a material change
of circumstances, but the making of the decision itself would not have been such a change.  Thus, although, the decision of 15 August 2018 had appeared to be correct
at the time it was made, it was shown both by the decision of the First-tier Tribunal given on 8 July 2019, awarding the claimant’s friend the daily living component of
personal independence payment from 18 July 2018, and by the decision of the Secretary of State given on 30 August 2019, re-awarding the claimant carer’s
allowance from 23 July 2018, to have been wrong when it was made.
 
27. Insofar as a decision is concerned with entitlement, that must be the correct approach.  It was made clear by the Court of Appeal in Reilly v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2016] EWCA Civ 413; [2017] Q.B. 257; [2017] AACR 14 at [137] that this is the way that retrospective legislation works and it seems to me that a retrospective decision as to entitlement made by either the Secretary of State or a
tribunal must operate in the same way.  Indeed, this must apply not only to decisions as to a claimant’s underlying entitlement but also to decisions as to whether a benefit
is “payable”, which is the term used where a claimant has not only an underlying “entitlement” but also an entitlement to receive payments.  The term “payable” is clearly
used in that sense in section 70(2) of the 1992 Act in relation to carer’s allowance (see paragraph 3, above).  The most obvious situation in which a claimant might have an
underlying entitlement to personal independence payment but that benefit may cease to be payable is where he or she has been residing in a care home or hospital for a
prolonged period of time

Hi,

Yes you can apply for the premiums it is via an ‘any time’ revision on the basis of an award of a qualifying benefit, in this case PIP. You simply need to write to Income Support and ask for the revision and they should be able to reopen the claim on that basis and then apply the premiums. If the SDP is then added to the claim I assume you will also be trying to get the transitional SDP element added onto the universal credit claim? This can be more problematic in the latest case I am dealing with I got the closed ESA claim reopened and they added the SDP retrospectively and then I have run into trouble with the transitional SDP element. I don’t think universal credit realised what I was asking for. I referred them to ADM Chapter M6: Effects of transition to UC; more details guidance on the transitional SDP element is found at M6710 - M6999. They have know sent my request to their techincal team. Hope that helps?