The London Borough of Waltham Forest v CA
[2024] UKUT 39 (AAC)
Ipswich Borough Council v TD & Anor
11 April 2024
[2024] UKUT 117 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal
A person can only get Universal Credit if they're entitled to at least one penny. A lower court wrongly said someone was still getting Universal Credit even when they received zero. The higher court corrected this, saying the lower court made a legal mistake, and sent the case back for a new decision.
Key Facts
- •Ipswich Borough Council appealed a First-tier Tribunal (FTT) decision that a housing benefit claimant (TD) was not overpaid housing benefit despite receiving nil universal credit payments.
- •TD and her partner received nil universal credit payments for five assessment periods.
- •Ipswich argued that the nil payments meant TD was not entitled to universal credit and therefore wrongly received full housing benefit.
- •The FTT allowed TD's appeal, concluding she remained 'on' universal credit despite nil payments.
- •The Upper Tribunal (UT) considered whether a nil award of universal credit is legally possible.
Legal Principles
A person is 'on universal credit' if entitled to it, regardless of payment (Regulation 2(3B), Housing Benefit Regulations 2006).
Housing Benefit Regulations 2006
A condition of universal credit entitlement is that the claimant's income allows for at least a one-penny payment (Sections 3(1)(b), 3(2)(b), 5(1)(b), 5(2)(b), Welfare Reform Act 2012; Regulation 17, Universal Credit Regulations 2013).
Welfare Reform Act 2012; Universal Credit Regulations 2013
A claim for universal credit ceases to subsist after a decision is made (Section 8(2), Social Security Act 1998).
Social Security Act 1998
Local authorities are generally bound by the Secretary of State's entitlement decisions regarding universal credit (R v Penwith DC ex parte Menear (1991) 24 HLR 115).
R v Penwith DC ex parte Menear (1991) 24 HLR 115
Regulations can disapply the general rule requiring a claim for universal credit (Regulation 6, then 32A, Universal Credit, Personal Independence Payment, Jobseeker’s Allowance and Employment and Support Allowance (Claims and Payments) Regulations 2013).
Universal Credit, Personal Independence Payment, Jobseeker’s Allowance and Employment and Support Allowance (Claims and Payments) Regulations 2013
Outcomes
The Upper Tribunal allowed Ipswich's appeal.
The FTT erred in law by concluding TD was entitled to universal credit when she received nil payments. A nil award of universal credit is legally impossible given the statutory minimum payment requirement.
The FTT's decision was set aside and the case remitted for redetermination by a new FTT.
The UT found that the FTT's decision was based on an error of law regarding the possibility of a nil award of universal credit. The new FTT must reconsider the case recognizing that TD was not entitled to universal credit during the periods of nil payments, which impacts the recoverability of housing benefit overpayments.