Income Support Legislation - Advice Needed

[3guesses]

I'm hoping that somebody could give me some advice regarding the Income Support legislation (a copy of the current legislation can be found here: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/a6-2501.pdf)

Yesterday, I represented a friend at her Income Support appeal. As a single mother she had been receiving Income Support until her son turned 11 this summer (since she was eligible under the lone parent criteria). This is not in dispute. However, she is also studying a part-time degree and therefore believes she is eligible as a "person in education". She submitted her appeal on this basis, but was rejected on the basis that she did not qualify as a lone parent (yes, that is not in dispute...). In her Appeal Papers they listed the "Prescribed Categories of Persons" as specified in Schedule 1B of the legislation, and simply highlighted the fact that she no longer met the criteria specified for being in the first category (Lone Parent):

Lone parents

1. A person who is a lone parent and responsible for–
(a) a single child aged under 10, or
(b) more than one child where the youngest is aged under 10, who is a member of that person’s household.

However, she does appear to satisfy the criteria specified for the category of "Persons in education":

Persons in education

15. A person to whom any provision of regulation 13(2)(a) to (e) (persons receiving relevant education who are parents, disabled persons, persons with limited leave to enter or remain, orphans and persons estranged from their parents or guardian) applies.

I raised this point at her tribunal hearing but the legal expert dismissed it saying that it had already been established that she did not satisfy the condition of being a parent. Unfortunately, I did not have a copy of the legislation with me so I was unable to challenge him at the time, but when I got home I checked the legislation again. It appears that the legal expert decided that the criteria to be classified as a "parent" were the same as the criteria to be eligible under the "lone parent" prescribed category (Schedule 1B). As it says above, a person in education is one to whom any provision of regulation 13(2)a applies:

13(2)(a) is the parent of a child for whom he is treated as responsible under regulation 15 (circumstances in which a person is to be treated as responsible or not responsible for another) and who is treated as a member of his household under regulation 16 (circumstances in which a person is to be treated as being or not being a member of the household);

So, according to 13(a)(a) my friend is classified as a parent if she "is the parent of a child for whom she is treated as responsible under regulation 15", which is:

Circumstances in which a person is to be treated as responsible or not responsible for another

15.—(1) Subject to the following provisions of this regulation, a person is to be treated as responsible for a child or young person for whom he is receiving child benefit and this includes a child or young person to whom paragraph (3) of regulation 14 applies.

So, my friend is classified as responsible for her son if she receives child benefit for him - which she does! Therefore she is eligible for Income Support because she satisfies the criteria specified as a "Person in education" (as per Schedule 1B of the legislation).

Can someone with some legal expertise please confirm whether or not I am correct???

[Caspar]

Re: Income Support Legislation - Advice Needed

I don't have formal legal expertise, but can't find any fault in your argument. What sort of idiot would say that she doesn't meet the criteria for a parent when she has an 11 year old son? Madness!

Have you tried phoning the benefit line purporting to be this person, record the conversation if possible (even if only by holding a mobile phone voice recorder next to it) and ask what she's entitled to. I can see why she doesn't classify as a lone parent anymore and have not actually read para 3 of Reg 14, but assuming things are clear under that I can see no errors in your reasoning.

[3guesses]

Re: Income Support Legislation - Advice Needed

What sort of idiot would say that she doesn't meet the criteria for a parent when she has an 11 year old son?

He was a judge, and he was very dismissive/high-handed with me. My friend got the distinct impression that he didn't like me from the moment we walked in. The whole purpose of her appointing me as her representative was because she has been pretty traumatised by this whole saga since her I.S. was stopped, and yet, after dismissing my initial points, the judge decided to interrogate her about her situation and kept complaining whenever I tried to speak for her.

[Caspar]

Re: Income Support Legislation - Advice Needed

I would appeal. I think the judge has made a mistake by not differentiating between parent and lone parent. How can she not "satisfy the condition of being a parent?" She's his mum - take the birth certificate along!

[3guesses]

Re: Income Support Legislation - Advice Needed

I'm very concerned that I have missed something or somehow misinterpreted the legislation - is there really no-one with some legal expertise who can confirm whether or not I am correct in my argument?

[Dibdob]

Re: Income Support Legislation - Advice Needed

I worked for the benefits agency for 10 years and although that was 15 years ago now and things have changed, I think you are right. A 'parent' according to IS rules is a person with a dependant who they receive child benefit for. I would definitely appeal, I briefly worked on the appeals section too and they are always busy!
I was in a hearing recently, very different to yours, but I was treated harshly by the judge too. He barely gave me chance to speak and didn't want to listen and it made me feel sick with nerves, very unfair. I am considering complaining to the office for judicial complaints about the judge.
Good luck with your appeal.

Debbie

[Caspar]

Re: Income Support Legislation - Advice Needed

I'm very concerned that I have missed something or somehow misinterpreted the legislation - is there really no-one with some legal expertise who can confirm whether or not I am correct in my argument?

Are you defining expertise as qualifications. I have no mechanical qualifications, but can take a car to pieces and put it together again, build motorhomes etc.....

I suspect the expertise on here is mostly well intentioned experience, not free legal advice from a qualified person. May be wrong, but that's the way I thought this works.

Totally understand your concerns though, not having a go! It's good someone with more direct experience has confirmed what I suggested - should give you more confidence! By the way, my brother is Executive Director of Change for the Department for Work and Pensions and he was happy for me to have advised that to you, BUT he has no legal expertise!