Tweet
Hi everyone, hopefully someone may be able to help with a family issue I'm helping with. My sister's father in law (PeterT) has been issued with a pension credit overpayment of c.£20K resulting in overpayments since 2003 - 2017. We have appealed this and have now finally obtained a mandatory reconsideration notice from DWP. We are intending to appeal this further via HMCTS.
In Sept 2003 he was one of the chosen 200,000 first households that were invited to apply for the new pension credit, before the public campaign officially got started. He applied over the phone, answered all their questions, was sent the completed form and signed it which resulted in pension credit being awarded. Then last year the bombshell - DWP claimed that he hadn't notified them of 5 small private pensions, which he denies. On his retirement in 1998 these pensions had been paid directly to his son who lives in Greece so he had never ever (and to date still hasn't) had them as "income". We now have the copy of the PC1 form that he duly signed, which had been filled in by someone over the phone & it indeed this doesn't mention the 5 annuties. He is adamant (although his memory is obviously sketchy) that he would have answered any questions asked over the phone honesty including any pensions he had. We have asked for the phone transcripts/recording but DWP say these are now not available. DWP are taking the view that the PC1 form he signed is proof of misrepresentation, whereas I contend in the knowledge that he is extremely honest that there is a strong probability that there is no evidence that he did misrepresent the facts over the phone and that the cause of the overpayment isn't misrepresentation but DWP error and in particular possibly with the questions asked by DWPs 3rd party phone operators. For example in 2003 the PC1 form question asked "Do you or your partner get a private pension..." he would correctly (in his mind) have answered NO whereas my research has shown that the PC1 form question changed years later to "Do you or your partner have a private pension that are paid to you or to any third party?" which he would have correctly answered YES. Could this material change in the pension question be considered adequate in an appeal to provide sufficient proof that the cause of the overpayment could be DWP error with Ventura the third party contracted to run DWPs new pension credit telephone service also lacking adequate training as documented by the Citizens Advice Bureau & Parliamentary committee reports of the time? There was also a strong motivation for Ventura/DWP to hit government targets regarding the take up of the new pension credit.
Interestingly, DWP are only asking for overpayments to start from April 2006 as they do not have the assessments of entitlements and/or payments issued for the period Oct 2003 - March 2006 so I wonder if this may be important?
Finally, the bombshell last year caused him, spurred on by the DWP investigator who stated that with his adverse health conditions he should have been claiming Attendance allowance for both him & his wife for years which has now been claimed. This creates a situation where we now know that benefits that he was entitled to weren't in fact being claimed and is there therefore the additional option within an appeal to claim that whereas there may be a pension credit overpayment this overpayment should legitimately be offset by other benefits that he wasn't claiming?
Sorry for the long post, but hopefully it provides enough detail for someone to provide an opinion/advice.
Many thanks
Roger
In Sept 2003 he was one of the chosen 200,000 first households that were invited to apply for the new pension credit, before the public campaign officially got started. He applied over the phone, answered all their questions, was sent the completed form and signed it which resulted in pension credit being awarded. Then last year the bombshell - DWP claimed that he hadn't notified them of 5 small private pensions, which he denies. On his retirement in 1998 these pensions had been paid directly to his son who lives in Greece so he had never ever (and to date still hasn't) had them as "income". We now have the copy of the PC1 form that he duly signed, which had been filled in by someone over the phone & it indeed this doesn't mention the 5 annuties. He is adamant (although his memory is obviously sketchy) that he would have answered any questions asked over the phone honesty including any pensions he had. We have asked for the phone transcripts/recording but DWP say these are now not available. DWP are taking the view that the PC1 form he signed is proof of misrepresentation, whereas I contend in the knowledge that he is extremely honest that there is a strong probability that there is no evidence that he did misrepresent the facts over the phone and that the cause of the overpayment isn't misrepresentation but DWP error and in particular possibly with the questions asked by DWPs 3rd party phone operators. For example in 2003 the PC1 form question asked "Do you or your partner get a private pension..." he would correctly (in his mind) have answered NO whereas my research has shown that the PC1 form question changed years later to "Do you or your partner have a private pension that are paid to you or to any third party?" which he would have correctly answered YES. Could this material change in the pension question be considered adequate in an appeal to provide sufficient proof that the cause of the overpayment could be DWP error with Ventura the third party contracted to run DWPs new pension credit telephone service also lacking adequate training as documented by the Citizens Advice Bureau & Parliamentary committee reports of the time? There was also a strong motivation for Ventura/DWP to hit government targets regarding the take up of the new pension credit.
Interestingly, DWP are only asking for overpayments to start from April 2006 as they do not have the assessments of entitlements and/or payments issued for the period Oct 2003 - March 2006 so I wonder if this may be important?
Finally, the bombshell last year caused him, spurred on by the DWP investigator who stated that with his adverse health conditions he should have been claiming Attendance allowance for both him & his wife for years which has now been claimed. This creates a situation where we now know that benefits that he was entitled to weren't in fact being claimed and is there therefore the additional option within an appeal to claim that whereas there may be a pension credit overpayment this overpayment should legitimately be offset by other benefits that he wasn't claiming?
Sorry for the long post, but hopefully it provides enough detail for someone to provide an opinion/advice.
Many thanks
Roger
Comment