- Posts: 15
- Forum
- Members forums
- ESA, PIP, UC and DLA Queries and Results
- UC mandatory reconsideration for rent deduction
× Members
UC mandatory reconsideration for rent deduction
- Rabbit55
- Topic Author
- Offline
Less More
4 days 12 hours ago #304739 by Rabbit55
UC mandatory reconsideration for rent deduction was created by Rabbit55
Hello,
I am not sure if there are grounds for a judicial review, but the claimant has a housing dispute with the landlord that is going through legal proceedings over disrepair.
When the claimant migrated to UC in March 2025. He made a journal entry as well as spoken to DWP staff directly in the Jobcentre as well showing the court notice etc on April 2025.
He also added the journal entry highlighting the outcome from the- R (Roberts) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2025] that took place in Jan 2025. He requested that any deduction requests should be put on hold until directed by the court on the journal.
There was no follow-up response from DWP via the journal on the matter during this period.
The claimant has paid the ground rent for April but withhold service charges in protest.
However, in mid-May 2025. The landlord has applied APA for £600 per month for service charge arrears. They have not mentioned the current court proceedings they are involved to the DWP. It was granted by default, which I suspect is from a computer system.
The DWP never informed the claimant of the deduction so he can challenge and provide evidence. He was informed after the deduction has been decided. He replied to the journal, but there was no response from DWP in regard to providing evidence to appeal.
The claimant challenged the decision via the journal, but not sure if this classed as mandatory reconsideration. Or does it form the written statement of reasons.
The claimant was contacted by the DWP near the payment day via the journal, that a decision maker has reviewed the case and that no evidence was provided on the claimant's part, thus the APA and MPTL remains in place. It was implying it was the claimant's fault.
However, at no point during the March - May period that the claimant was provided a chance to submit evidence or contest the matter fairly prior to the deduction was decided and made. There was no sign posting on what official protocols to follow. Claimant could not upload documents/evidence via the UC journal.
The deduction was all decided without the claimant involved.
The claimant has got the UC paid but at a reduced amount.
Is there grounds for a judicial review if the appeal process doesn't exist?
Any advice would be appreciated.
Note:
APA = Alternate payment arrangement
MPTL = Managed payment to Landlord
I am not sure if there are grounds for a judicial review, but the claimant has a housing dispute with the landlord that is going through legal proceedings over disrepair.
When the claimant migrated to UC in March 2025. He made a journal entry as well as spoken to DWP staff directly in the Jobcentre as well showing the court notice etc on April 2025.
He also added the journal entry highlighting the outcome from the- R (Roberts) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2025] that took place in Jan 2025. He requested that any deduction requests should be put on hold until directed by the court on the journal.
There was no follow-up response from DWP via the journal on the matter during this period.
The claimant has paid the ground rent for April but withhold service charges in protest.
However, in mid-May 2025. The landlord has applied APA for £600 per month for service charge arrears. They have not mentioned the current court proceedings they are involved to the DWP. It was granted by default, which I suspect is from a computer system.
The DWP never informed the claimant of the deduction so he can challenge and provide evidence. He was informed after the deduction has been decided. He replied to the journal, but there was no response from DWP in regard to providing evidence to appeal.
The claimant challenged the decision via the journal, but not sure if this classed as mandatory reconsideration. Or does it form the written statement of reasons.
The claimant was contacted by the DWP near the payment day via the journal, that a decision maker has reviewed the case and that no evidence was provided on the claimant's part, thus the APA and MPTL remains in place. It was implying it was the claimant's fault.
However, at no point during the March - May period that the claimant was provided a chance to submit evidence or contest the matter fairly prior to the deduction was decided and made. There was no sign posting on what official protocols to follow. Claimant could not upload documents/evidence via the UC journal.
The deduction was all decided without the claimant involved.
The claimant has got the UC paid but at a reduced amount.
Is there grounds for a judicial review if the appeal process doesn't exist?
Any advice would be appreciated.
Note:
APA = Alternate payment arrangement
MPTL = Managed payment to Landlord
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- David
- Away
Less More
- Posts: 2247
3 days 16 hours ago #304768 by David
Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems
Replied by David on topic UC mandatory reconsideration for rent deduction
Hi Rabbit55
Here is a quote from a thread ( www.rightsnet.org.uk/Forums/1627782/Free...wthread/20971/#97740 ) on Rightsnet that I started in March of this year.
I haven't had training on making Judicial Reviews so you really need to look for an appropriate adviser. Maybe Rightsnet can assist?
Those living in private sector accommodation are given the opportunity to challenge the application for the direct payment within seven days if they do not have rent arrears or are engaged in a formal disrepair dispute with their landlord and are withholding rent. If they do so, the APA will not be set up and the claimant is asked to provide evidence that the rent arrears do not exist, or that a repairs dispute exists and give a good reason why the direct payment should not be put in place and have 14 days to take this action. This evidence must include copies of letters from the landlord and claimant regarding the dispute or letters from the Local Authority Housing or Environmental Health Department confirming there is an issue. If a claimant provides the evidence, a decision maker will consider whether the APA should be put in place or not. If a claimant does not provide evidence to support this statement by the agreed date or states at the outset that they cannot provide any evidence to support the dispute, then the direct payment to the landlord is set up. Because an APA will only be paid 7 days after the assessment period, where a claimant has objected within 7 days the direct payment will not be made until they have had an opportunity to object.”
David
Here is a quote from a thread ( www.rightsnet.org.uk/Forums/1627782/Free...wthread/20971/#97740 ) on Rightsnet that I started in March of this year.
I haven't had training on making Judicial Reviews so you really need to look for an appropriate adviser. Maybe Rightsnet can assist?
Those living in private sector accommodation are given the opportunity to challenge the application for the direct payment within seven days if they do not have rent arrears or are engaged in a formal disrepair dispute with their landlord and are withholding rent. If they do so, the APA will not be set up and the claimant is asked to provide evidence that the rent arrears do not exist, or that a repairs dispute exists and give a good reason why the direct payment should not be put in place and have 14 days to take this action. This evidence must include copies of letters from the landlord and claimant regarding the dispute or letters from the Local Authority Housing or Environmental Health Department confirming there is an issue. If a claimant provides the evidence, a decision maker will consider whether the APA should be put in place or not. If a claimant does not provide evidence to support this statement by the agreed date or states at the outset that they cannot provide any evidence to support the dispute, then the direct payment to the landlord is set up. Because an APA will only be paid 7 days after the assessment period, where a claimant has objected within 7 days the direct payment will not be made until they have had an opportunity to object.”
David
Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- David
- Away
Less More
- Posts: 2247
3 days 16 hours ago #304769 by David
Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems
Replied by David on topic UC mandatory reconsideration for rent deduction
Just to add to my reply this update from the Guardian--
Update
Update via the Guardian (25 February 2025) -
'The work and pensions secretary, Liz Kendall, has confirmed that the DWP will not appeal against the judge’s decision and will examine ways to replace the automated program with a system that gives tenants more say over benefit deductions.
“I am determined to right the wrongs that have persisted in the benefits system for too long. The automatic approval of landlords’ requests for tenants’ benefits to be deducted is one of these,” Kendall said.'
David
Update
Update via the Guardian (25 February 2025) -
'The work and pensions secretary, Liz Kendall, has confirmed that the DWP will not appeal against the judge’s decision and will examine ways to replace the automated program with a system that gives tenants more say over benefit deductions.
“I am determined to right the wrongs that have persisted in the benefits system for too long. The automatic approval of landlords’ requests for tenants’ benefits to be deducted is one of these,” Kendall said.'
David
Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Moderators: Gordon, latetrain, BIS, Catherine, Wendy, Kelly, greekqueen, peter, Katherine, Super User, Chris, David