UK Social Security and Child Support Commissioners' Decisions

[2005] UKSSCSC CH_524_2004 (10 March 2005)

 


CH/524/2004

DECISION OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSIONER

1. This appeal against the decision of the Birkenhead appeal tribunal dated 24 November 2003 has lapsed because the local authority has already awarded the claimant housing benefit and council tax benefit in respect of the period from 15 July 2002 to 26 January 2003 at the rates of £47.83 pw and £13.77 pw respectively.

REASONS

2. The local authority accepts that the claimant submitted a claim for housing benefit and council tax benefit on 11 July 2002. It asked him for information which it did not receive and, on 16 December 2002, it closed his claim. On 21 January 2003, the claimant submitted a new claim, seeking to have it back-dated to the date of his previous claim. The local authority awarded benefit only from 27 January 2003. The claimant appealed against the refusal to back-date the claim. The tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding it difficult to see how the claimant could show good cause for failing to make a claim before 21 January 2003 when he had in fact made such a claim. The claimant now appeals against the tribunal's decision with the leave of Mr Commissioner Henty.
3. However, following the decision of the Tribunal of Commissioners in R(H) 3/05, the local authority has made a decision on the claim made on 11 July 2002 and has awarded the claimant benefit for the whole period in issue. The claimant is happy with that decision. It makes no difference whether that is an initial decision on the claim or a revision of a decision made on 16 December 2002 (on the basis that the closure of the claimant's claim on 16 December 2002 was effectively a decision that he was not entitled to benefit). What is important is that it makes it inappropriate for me to take the approach suggested in my Direction dated 22 September 2004, which was to treat the appeal to the tribunal as being an appeal against a decision given on 16 December 2002 as well as against the decision not to back-date the later claim. There is simply no need for me to take that approach when the local authority has already made the necessary award. Furthermore, the whole question of back-dating the later claim has become academic because there can be no question of two claims for a benefit succeeding in respect of the same period. For that reason, it seems to me to be appropriate to treat this appeal as having lapsed because the claim for back-dating must be treated as having lapsed.

(signed on the original) MARK ROWLAND

Commissioner

10 March 2005