Council Tax and Housing benefit overpayment
samuelw...@hotmail.com
I really hope someone can help me, I have a friend who recently
recieved a letter from the council saying that he had been overpaid
benefits totalling £2500 12/09/05 to 29/9/06. Unfortunately he is
reluctant to query it in anyway and because hes just inherited some
money, taken the decision to just pay it back in one lump sum.
Now I have all his documentation, with it the councils letters and
calculations to how they came up with the amount. The figures all
seem to be correct, in terms of declarations made. however, everything
stems from a visit by a "visiting officer" on the 20/09/06. My
friend had made repeated visits to the support services informing them
of all his payments including an attempt by the council several months
previously claiming fraudelent activity. This was proven to be
cumalative errors made by the benefit agency and was completely
cleared. This process required my friend to declade through
documentary evidence all earning, incomes and outgoings.
My point is this, why should he pay back £2500 when it was clear that
they had all the necessary documents to make a decision several months
prior indicating it was their mistake. To sum up, the figures are
correct, he was paid too much, but he declared all earnings at every
step of the way, how can he be responsible for a whole year of
overpayments? I read somewhere that he can ask to "...decide the
overpayment is "unrecoverable" because you could not have reasonably
known you were being overpaid"
What should my friend do? If he were to appeal to the independents
appeals tribunal would the penalty be more severe (like getting caught
on a speed camera...). Any help or further information would be
brilliant, like i say, my friend would prefer to avoid confrontation
then to get stuck in and argue the case because he can now afford it,
the principle is of course that £2500 is a lot of money and i am more
than happy to fight on his behalf.
Many many thanks
Sam
Niteawk
<samuelw...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1177405445.0...@u32g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
Hi there
Many many thanks
Sam
That is a massive overpayment, £48.00 per week, what proof of income did
your friend give, pay slips?
Robbie
The appeals tribunal wouldn't penalise your friend if he were to take up
the option of appeal. However, I believe (hopefully someone will correct
me if I am wrong) that he can only appeal against the amount of the
overpayment, not the fact that the overpayment itself is recoverable.
His first step should be to get some organisation like Citizens Advice
or another welfare organisation to help fight his corner. He needs to do
this quickly though, appeals normally have to be made within 28 days of
a decision.
--
Robbie
Robbie
Plus other things - has he any receipts, proof that he provided this
information etc etc.
The £48 per week may include Council Tax Benefit - is this the case?
--
Robbie
fido
I had the same problem with Working Tax Credit. It was their mistake
but I 'should have known I was being overpaid'. I'm paying it back at
10GBP per month. I couldn't appeal as I was not disputing their
figures, only the fact it was their mistake and I couldn't have know
at the time I was being overpaid. It seems you have the same
situation. Try the CAB first, then if they can't help, contact you MP.
However, if someone is overpaid, they normally have to pay it back.
About time the law was changed.
Robbie
The Inland Revenue, or whatever they are called this week, are more
stricter about repaying money. There is Social Security law and guidance
which can be applied to the likes of Housing Benefit which doesn't apply
to Tax Credits. Of course, Working Tax Credit replaced a Social Security
benefit, but that doesn't wash with the Tax Office. Owing the Exchequer
money is seen as more serious than owing the DWP and there are different
rules about repaying what you owe. In the DWP, overpayments can be more
readily written off - there appears to be more discretion (and dare I
say it, more common sense).
--
Robbie
Fretu
> My point is this, why should he pay back £2500 when it was clear that
> they had all the necessary documents to make a decision several months
> prior indicating it was their mistake. To sum up, the figures are
> correct, he was paid too much, but he declared all earnings at every
> step of the way, how can he be responsible for a whole year of
> overpayments? I read somewhere that he can ask to "...decide the
> overpayment is "unrecoverable" because you could not have reasonably
> known you were being overpaid"
>
It happened to me (£1000), as I could not afford it because I had spent
everything we negotiated some installments plan.
You can't refuse to pay just because it was their fault, the Housing
Benefit letters say it clearly "overpayments must be repaid in full".
I did consider not paying anyway as I could not afford it, I though lets
them take me to court. They wouldn't have done that as no money was
available from me and unlikely a judge would have jailed me over it, but
then I was told the next time I claim benefits they would not pay me
anything as I own them money.
It looks bad for you, if you are still on benefits they will simply
deduct it from it.
--
Netvibes: http://www.netvibes.com
samuelw...@hotmail.com
just gave it to them and yes it was payslips everyone of em and yes it
includes council tax benefit too. So the best thing to do is
citizens advice? I think the crucial thing is that he provided them
with this information at a certain time, if that can be proved, then
he shouldn't pay up because its not his fault its there error. Any
thoughts on how to get this proof?
Robbie
I think he would be better off getting help from CAB given the amount
involved.
If he has no proof he handed in the wage slips then there's little he
can do to get this proof way down the line if these wage slips are now
missing. As I suggest, far better he gets some help from CAB or similar,
and as soon as possible. At the very least they may be able to help
reduce the overpayment, which would be better than nothing.
--
Robbie
Martin McGowan
>
>> My point is this, why should he pay back £2500 when it was clear that
>> they had all the necessary documents to make a decision several months
>> prior indicating it was their mistake. To sum up, the figures are
>
> It happened to me (£1000), as I could not afford it because I had spent
> everything we negotiated some installments plan.
>
> You can't refuse to pay just because it was their fault, the Housing
> Benefit letters say it clearly "overpayments must be repaid in full".
>
> I did consider not paying anyway as I could not afford it, I though lets
> them take me to court. They wouldn't have done that as no money was
> available from me and unlikely a judge would have jailed me over it, but
> then I was told the next time I claim benefits they would not pay me
> anything as I own them money.
>
> It looks bad for you, if you are still on benefits they will simply
> deduct it from it.
>
>
>
Actually if the mistake is by the benefits agencies then it can be
written off. Due to mistakes by the DWP i was overpaid by the housing
benefit dept. DWP admitted they had made a mistake but claimed it was
not an official error. it went to the tribunal and she was scathing
about DWP. and the overpayment was wiped out. The deductions they had
already started making had to be repaid.
With regard to inland revenue i know in general taxation cases a similar
situation is true, except the remittance for official error is on a
sliding scale depending on your income, from 100% on low incomes to 10%
on very high earnings. I suspect that our "Gord" rewrote the rules on
official error when it came down to tax credits.
Martin McGowan
anthonyberet
> Fretu wrote:
>>
>>> My point is this, why should he pay back £2500 when it was clear that
>>> they had all the necessary documents to make a decision several months
>>> prior indicating it was their mistake. To sum up, the figures are
>>> snip
>>
>> It happened to me (£1000), as I could not afford it because I had
>> spent everything we negotiated some installments plan.
>>
>> You can't refuse to pay just because it was their fault, the Housing
>> Benefit letters say it clearly "overpayments must be repaid in full".
>>
>> I did consider not paying anyway as I could not afford it, I though
>> lets them take me to court. They wouldn't have done that as no money
>> was available from me and unlikely a judge would have jailed me over
>> it, but then I was told the next time I claim benefits they would not
>> pay me anything as I own them money.
>>
>> It looks bad for you, if you are still on benefits they will simply
>> deduct it from it.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Actually if the mistake is by the benefits agencies then it can be
> written off. Due to mistakes by the DWP i was overpaid by the housing
> benefit dept. DWP admitted they had made a mistake but claimed it was
> not an official error. it went to the tribunal and she was scathing
> about DWP. and the overpayment was wiped out. The deductions they had
> already started making had to be repaid.
There is a bit more to it than that. There are two conditions for an
overpayment to be deemed 'unrecoverable'. This is that the error was
entirely on the authority's part ie the claimant did nothing to
contribute to it, and that the claimant could not reasonably have been
expected to know that they were being overpaid. You tribunal must have
felt that both these were satisfied in your case.
Even if an overpayment is recoverable, the authority can still choose
not to recover it. This is not appealable though.
>
> With regard to inland revenue i know in general taxation cases a similar
> situation is true, except the remittance for official error is on a
> sliding scale depending on your income, from 100% on low incomes to 10%
> on very high earnings. I suspect that our "Gord" rewrote the rules on
> official error when it came down to tax credits.
Yes you are quite right, the recovery rules for 'clawback' of
tax-credits from future payments are much more draconian than for HB,
which is about £9 pw in most cases.
anthonyberet
Yes that is right. You could appeal and argue this point. If he did give
in evidence of his income/capital, then the LA wont deny this, as long
as they have it on file.
>
> What should my friend do? If he were to appeal to the independents
> appeals tribunal would the penalty be more severe (like getting caught
> on a speed camera...).
No there is no penalty for losing. Although if there is some other
reason why there is more overpaid, then calling attention to a case can
sometimes mean a bigger overpayment as this then get noticed. Sometimes
benefit staff go easy on people, but when called to appeals tribunal, a
case needs to be exactly correct for the LA to win it.
>Any help or further information would be
> brilliant, like i say, my friend would prefer to avoid confrontation
> then to get stuck in and argue the case because he can now afford it,
> the principle is of course that £2500 is a lot of money and i am more
> than happy to fight on his behalf.
There is no harm in appealing - it doesn't cost anything and it is your
friend's right. Your friend must sign the appeal letter, as you cannot
appeal on his behalf, although you can basically do all the writing, and
even represent him at the tribunal, if you have his written permission
to act for you.
The relevant regulation about recoverability is reg 100(2), pasted below:
The Housing Benefit Regulations 2006 [SI 2006/213]
100. Recoverable overpayments
(1) Any overpayment, except one to which paragraph (2) applies, shall
be recoverable.
(2) Subject to paragraph (4) this paragraph applies to an overpayment
which arose in consequence of an official error where the claimant or a
person acting on his behalf or any other person to whom the payment is
made could not, at the time of receipt of the payment or of any notice
relating to that payment, reasonably have been expected to realise that
it was an overpayment. SI 2005/2904
(3) In paragraph (2), "overpayment which arose in consequence of an
official error" means an overpayment caused by a mistake made whether in
the form of an act or omission by—
(a) the relevant authority;
(b) an officer or person acting for that authority;
(c) an officer of—
(i) the Department for Work and Pensions; or
(ii) Revenue and Customs, acting as such; or
(d) a person providing services to the Department for Work and
Pensions or to the Commissioners for Her Majesty´s Revenue and Customs,
where the claimant, a person acting on his behalf or any other person
to whom the payment is made, did not cause or materially contribute to
that mistake, act or omission.
(4) Where in consequence of an official error, a person has been
awarded rent rebate to which he was not entitled or which exceeded the
benefit to which he was entitled, upon the award being revised or
superseded any overpayment of benefit, which remains credited to him by
the relevant authority in respect of a period after the date on which
the revision or supersession took place, shall be recoverable.
--
anthonyberet
samwo...@yahoo.com
New problem -
Rightly, a Council that discovers any householder has been receiving Housing Benefit that they are not entitled to - Sanctions could be imposed.
BUT WHAT OF A SITUATION WHERE THE COUNCIL OFFICIALS GET IT WRONG?
Indeed to such a degree IT IS ENDEMIC!
Ask their benefts client to pay £1.7 MILLION on a bank card!
Quickly put right, but the figures on the council card machine appeared to have come out of the air - Even the pence was wrong.
As for the data used in the calculation of assets, there appears to be a distinct lack of simple arithmetic. Mixing up of numbers. Yet missing out on others.
Concept 1. The officer adds up two refund totals for thefts, that resulted in a surplus credit. These three amounts were then added togther!
Even worse the addition was incorrect.
2. What should have been the asset/savings figure used -
Was this surplus credit, PLUS ANY GIT from the credit card company.
3. The Council officer used though the figure from 1. Some £1600!
4. Actual amount should have been £300 if one includes the gift from the bank.
£1300 was clearing the stolen money -no access available to cardholder.
Readers will have guessed the outcome of the officers error the total money for the couple was over £16000
If one includes legal bills & time endeavouring to get it sorted £1000 bill
at this time.
Oh! And incidentally no holding back on the Council reclaiming the alleged over payments. Landlord immediately had the alledged over payment TAKEN BACK. Whilst customer forced to pay back Council Tax involved.
Being pensioners in their 80's is immatarial.
Finally how many of our readers appreciate - How much the Council,not sure about the officers -
Receives out of discovering an alleged or actual wrong housing benefit claim?
If a claimant is issued with a notice of a wrong claim. She/he is required to pay back the Council Tax & the Housing Benefit rent. Say £600, it could be much more obviously.not just the weekly rent involved but also the period the Council officer deems to be the number of weeks the alleged defrauding has taken place.
Readers might be staggered to read -
In this example the Council gets £600 from Government.
So finding scores of alleged or actual benefits fraudsters is a huge revenue source.
If I or anyone else, has wrongly received benefits of any kind, then cutting out theft plus rewarding officials is very good long term. But get it wrong, on clients of any age or circumstances is a worse situation. Criminal since these officials a. should know better b. wrongly accusing claimants can result in very serious health issues for the household including any children.
There also seems to be a very low priority rectifying a Council error - perhaps
they are awaiting the Government ' Pieces of Eight!'
It would be interesting to read what sanctions these Councils get, if they get it wrong. Being professionals -they have less excuses. Or ????
SamWoe