Login FormClose

Free, fortnightly PIP, ESA and DLA Updates

Our fortnightly updates bulletin is the UK's leading source of benefits news. Get the facts about what's changing, how it affects you and how to prepare. Our mailing list is securely managed by icontact in the US.

The DWP confirmed to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) last week that they will pay the minimum amount they can legally get away with to claimants who were underpaid ESA as a result of DWP errors. This means that they will not backdate all the way to the date of the error in many cases and also will not pay any consequential losses, such as prescription charges claimants should have been exempt from.

In March of this year we reported that the DWP failed to award income-related ESA to around 70,000 claimants who were transferred from incapacity benefit to contribution-based ESA from 2011 onwards.

Affected claimants are owed between £2,500 and £20,000 each.

However, the DWP are insisting that they are only legally obliged to repay underpayments from 21 October 2014, when the upper tribunal first ruled that contribution-based and income-based ESA are a single benefit and that the DWP has a duty to assess claimants for eligibility to both types of ESA when a claim is made.

This means that underpayments from before this date all the way back to 2011 can simply be ignored by the DWP. Child Poverty Action Group are currently mounting a legal challenge to this decision by the DWP.

In evidence to the PAC, Peter Schofield, DWP Permanent Secretary, insisted that compensation would not be paid to claimants who had lost out:

“We don’t pay blanket compensation in situations where the courts have told us to interpret a piece of legislation in a particular way. We don’t do that . . . I have a responsibility, as accounting officer, and I have looked carefully at this in the context of “Managing public money”. The key point here is not to create precedents that put the taxpayer at risk.”

Schofield was then pressed by the Chair of the committee:

“Just to be clear, if you were paying prescription charges or something—the passported benefits—would people individually be able to get those refunded, if they can prove that they had to pay them?”

Schofield responded that prescription charges would not be refunded:

“We are not introducing a blanket compensation scheme . . . No. I have assessed this from the point of view of an accounting officer, and I don’t believe that is consistent with “Managing public money”.

Schofield also revealed that the DWP intend to have processed all repayments by next April and that “hopefully” they would begin processing repayments in June to the next-of-kin of claimants who have died.

The PAC also praised the welfare rights website Rightsnet for first highlighting the issue. The chair suggested that the welfare rights worker (Andrew Dutton from Derbyshire Welfare Rights Service) who spotted the problem and first wrote to the DWP about the underpayments, should be bought a pint.

You can read the PAC meeting minutes here.

Comments  

#4 Elaine 2018-06-06 14:04
How Inconvenient I am, having paid for a prepayment Certificate every year at over £100, and the maximum for dentistry most years too. How Unreasonable of me to want this money back. I should be delighted to enrich the Exchequer by tjhis amount every year, even though they have refused to index part of my benefits as I am a long term disabled person who paid in more when in Employment.

I was told - by a benefits advisor, not the DWP - that I may be in this group, and I rang last month to enquire whether this was the case. I was told that I was going to be reassessed, but they hadno idea when. I now need urgent dental treatment, as my medication has damaged my teeth - a known side effect - and I rang, yesterday, to ask whether I should pay. I was told that they had no idea, but, IF I PAID i WOULD BE REIMBURSED IN FULL!! I can not believe this misleading advice is being given, a full week after this piece was written.

I will be telling the dentists that I am eligible for FREE treatment when they ask me. If I am eventually found liable to pay, then I will do so, but until they tell me I am I shall assume that I am not. If they will not repay those who are entitled to free prescriptions and treatment then we must ensure that we do not make payments that they are not entitled to. I cannot condone their effective theft of my benefits.
+1 #3 JAXIE 2018-06-06 11:02
I wonder if they could get away with that if it had been the Lords or parliament members who had been underpaid from the public purse for a few years. I bet, that would be another matter entirely.
#2 tintack 2018-05-30 23:52
Quote:
Schofield responded that prescription charges would not be refunded:

“We are not introducing a blanket compensation scheme . . . No. I have assessed this from the point of view of an accounting officer, and I don’t believe that is consistent with “Managing public money”.
I wonder if Schofield managed to keep a straight face as he said that - after all, handing over billions of pounds to private corporations to carry out assessments which tribunals frequently find to be wrong is apparently just fine.

In particular, giving Maximus a £1.6billion WCA contract whose terms oblige them to make savings of £1billion - thus ensuring that the public loses out to the tune of £600million even if the terms of the contract are met - is clearly what "managing public money" is all about.
+3 #1 mrfibrospondodysthmatic 2018-05-30 15:15
Just goes to show the government, especially the DWP just seem to do what they want, and as and when they want, even if ordered by a court.

So much for a just system, and no one or any governmental body wants to listen to the plight of the ill, sick and disabled people of our nation.

You need to be logged in to comment