Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber)

IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL Case No.  CIS/935/2013

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS CHAMBER

 

Before Upper Tribunal Judge Robin C A White

 

Decision: The decision of the tribunal of 5 November 2012 is erroneous in law. I set it aside. I remake the decision of the tribunal.

My substituted decision:

The respondent had a right to reside as a person with retained worker status when she made her claim for income support on 19 March 2012. She was habitually resident in the United Kingdom on that date, and was, accordingly, not a person from abroad when she made her claim.

REASONS FOR DECISION

A. Preliminaries

1.     I will refer, for ease of comprehension, in this decision to the appellant as “the Secretary of State” and to the respondent as “the claimant”.

2.     This appeal has taken an inordinate length of time to determine. This has been the result of some developments in the case-law, which has necessitated requests for further information and observations from the parties. In at least one case, it took the claimant’s representative some considerable time to respond to my further directions. I am grateful to the representatives of the parties for their forbearance in the face of the several sets of directions which have been issued in this case.

B. Background and context

3.     The claimant, who was born on 21 September 1969, is a Polish national who first came to the United Kingdom on 1 December 2008. She intends to live permanently in the United Kingdom.

4.     The claimant undertook work obtained through agencies. Information before the tribunal suggested that the claimant first worked in January 2009 and last worked on 3 March 2011.

5.     The Workers Registration Scheme for nationals of the A8 countries (which included Poland) ended on 30 April 2011.

6.     The claimant was in receipt of jobseeker’s allowance from 16 May 2011.

7.     The claimant was in receipt of maternity allowance from 19 June 2011, and her first child, a daughter, was born on 18 September 2011. The claimant’s maternity allowance ended on 17 March 2012.

8.     On 19 March 2012 the claimant made a claim for income support on the basis that she was a lone parent.

9.     On 12 April 2012 a decision maker decided that the claimant did not have a right to reside in the United Kingdom, and so was to be treated as a person from abroad and not entitled to income support.

10.  On 29 May 2012 the claimant appealed with the assistance of a representative on the grounds that her pattern of work and benefits meant that she had a right to reside as a person who retained her status as a worker.

11.  The decision was reconsidered on 27 July 2012 but was not changed.

12.  The appeal came before the First-tier Tribunal on 5 November 2012. Neither party attended nor was represented at the hearing. The outcome of the appeal was that the decision of the Secretary of State was set aside and the tribunal decided:

Subject to satisfying all conditions of entitlement the appellant is entitled to Income Support from the date of her claim 19/03/2012 since at that time she had a right to reside in the UK.

13.  A statement of reasons was subsequently provided on 20 December 2012.

14.  The appeal by the Secretary of State against the tribunal’s decision now comes before me with my permission.

C. The grounds of appeal

15.  The Secretary of State’s grounds of appeal are that the tribunal erred in ruling, in effect, that following the end of the restrictions which applied to nationals from the A8 countries, the claimant had the same rights as a national of the United Kingdom. Following the end of the restrictions on A8 nationals, such nationals were, like all citizens of the Union, required to show a right to reside in order to be entitled to income support.

D. Did the tribunal err in law?

16.  The tribunal’s decision is erroneous in law. It simply progresses from the ending of the Workers Registration Scheme which applied to Polish nationals to the proposition that the claimant was entitled to income support. It fails to consider whether she satisfied the conditions for meeting the right to reside test which applies to all nationals of Member States of the European Union.

17.  Accordingly, I set the tribunal’s decision aside.

18.  This is a case in which it is appropriate for me to remake the decision of the tribunal, particularly as I have gone to some trouble to seek to establish a firmer factual basis for the determination of the appeal than appeared from the material put before the First-tier Tribunal by the decision maker.

19.  The remainder of this decision is my assessment of the appeal in the light of additional factual material and further argument that has been put before me by the representatives of the parties.

E. National law

20.  Entitlement to income support arises under s.124 of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992.

21.  The conditions of entitlement to income support require that the person is in Great Britain and, unless in an exempt group, is habitually resident in the United Kingdom, the Republic of Ireland, the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man. No one can satisfy the habitual residence test unless he or she has a right to reside in the territories listed above.

22.  Those who do not satisfy the habitual residence test are categorised as persons from abroad whose applicable amount for income support purposes is deemed to be nil.

23.  The key provision is to be found in regulation 21AA of the Income Support (General) Regulations 1987, as amended. This regulation provides, so far as relevant to the circumstances presented in this appeal:

Special cases: supplemental—persons from abroad

21AA.—(1) “Person from abroad” means, subject to the following provisions of this regulation, a claimant who is not habitually resident in the United Kingdom, the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man or the Republic of Ireland.

(2) No claimant shall be treated as habitually resident in the United Kingdom, the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man or the Republic of Ireland unless he has a right to reside in (as the case may be) the United Kingdom, the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man or the Republic of Ireland other than a right to reside which falls within paragraph (3).

(3) A right to reside falls within this paragraph if it is one which exists by virtue of, or in accordance with, one or more of the following:

(a) regulation 13 of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006;

(b) regulation 14 of those Regulations, but only in a case where the right exists under the regulation because the claimant is—

(i) a jobseeker for the purposes of the definition of “qualified person” in regulation 6(1) of those Regulations, or

(ii) a family member (within the meaning of regulation 7 of those Regulations) of such a jobseeker;

(c) Article 6 of Council Directive No. 2004/38/EC; or

(d)   Article 39 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (in a case where the claimant is a person seeking work in the United Kingdom, the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man or the Republic of Ireland).

(4) A person is not a person from abroad if he is—

(a) a worker for the purposes of Council Directive No 2004/38/EC;

(b) a self-employed person for the purposes of that Directive;

(c) a person who retains a status referred to in sub-paragraph (a) or (b) pursuant to Article 7(3) of that Directive;

(d) a person who is a family member of a person referred to in sub-paragraph (a), (b) or (c) within the meaning of Article 2 of that Directive;

(e) a person who has a right to reside permanently in the United Kingdom by virtue of Article 17 of that Directive

… .

F. European Community law

24. I am concerned with the Treaty and secondary legislation in effect as at the date of decision, namely April 2012.

25. The following provisions of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union  are relevant in this appeal:

Article 21 TFEU

1. Every citizen of the Union shall have the right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States, subject to the limitations and conditions paid down in this Treaty and by the measures adopted to give it effect.

Article 45 TFEU

1. Freedom of movement for workers shall be secured within the Union.

2. Such freedom of movement shall entail the abolition of any discrimination based on nationality between workers of the Member States as regards employment, remuneration and other conditions of work and employment.

26. The following provisions of the Citizenship Directive (Directive 2004/38/EC) are relevant to this appeal:

CHAPTER III

RIGHT OF RESIDENCE

Article 6

Right of residence for up to three months

1. Union citizens shall have the right of residence on the territory of another Member State for a period of up to three months without any conditions or any formalities other than the requirement to hold a valid identity card or passport.

2. The provisions of paragraph 1 shall also apply to family members in possession of a valid passport who are not nationals of a Member State, accompanying or joining the Union citizen.

Article 7

Right of residence for more than three months

1. All Union citizens shall have the right of residence on the territory of another Member State for a period of longer than three months if they:

(a)   are workers or self-employed persons in the host Member State; or

(b)   have sufficient resources for themselves and their family members not to become a burden on the social assistance system of the host Member State during their period of residence and have comprehensive sickness insurance cover in the host Member State; or

(c)   — are enrolled at a private or public establishment, accredited or financed by the host Member State on the basis of its legislation or administrative practice, for the principal purpose of following a course of study, including vocational training; and

— have comprehensive sickness insurance cover in the host Member State and assure the relevant national authority, by means of a declaration or by such equivalent means as they may choose, that they have sufficient resources for themselves and their family members not to become a burden on the social assistance system of the host Member State during their period of residence; or

(d)   are family members accompanying or joining a Union citizen who satisfies the conditions referred to in points (a), (b) or (c).

2. The right of residence provided for in paragraph 1 shall extend to family members who are not nationals of a Member State, accompanying or joining the Union citizen in the host Member State, provided that such Union citizen satisfies the conditions referred to in paragraph 1(a), (b) or (c).

3. For the purposes of paragraph 1(a), a Union citizen who is no longer a worker or self-employed person shall retain the status of worker or self-employed person in the following circumstances:

(a)   he/she is temporarily unable to work as the result of an illness or accident;

(b)   he/she is in duly recorded involuntary unemployment after having been employed for more than one year and has registered as a job-seeker with the relevant employment office;

(c)   he/she is in duly recorded involuntary unemployment after completing a fixed-term employment contract of less than a year or after having become involuntarily unemployed during the first twelve months and has registered as a job-seeker with the relevant employment office. In this case, the status of worker shall be retained for no less than six months;

(d)   he/she embarks on vocational training. Unless he/she is involuntarily unemployed, the retention of the status of worker shall require the training to be related to the previous employment.

4. By way of derogation from  paragraphs 1(d) and 2 above, only the spouse, the registered partner provided for in Article 2(2)(b) and dependent children shall have the right of residence as family members of a Union citizen meeting the conditions under 1(c) above. Article 3(2) shall apply to his/her dependent direct relatives in the ascending lines and those of his/her spouse or registered partner.

Article 24

Equal treatment

1. Subject to such specific provisions as are expressly provided for in the Treaty and secondary law, all Union citizens residing on the basis of this Directive in the territory of the host Member State shall enjoy equal treatment with the nationals of that Member State within the scope of the Treaty. The benefit of this right shall be extended to family members who are not nationals of a Member State and who have the right of residence or permanent residence.

2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, the host Member State shall not be obliged to confer entitlement to social assistance during the first three months of residence or, where appropriate, the longer period provided for in Article 14(4)(b), nor shall it be obliged, prior to acquisition of the right of permanent residence, to grant maintenance aid for studies, including vocation training, consisting in student grants or student loans to person other than workers, self-employed persons, person who retain such status and members of their families.

G. My assessment

Some clarification of the factual position

27.  Save where contradicted by material below, I adopt the facts set out in paragraphs 3 to 9 above.

28.  The claimant has produced an Accession State Worker Registration Scheme Registration Certificate and Card. The Certificate refers to a job start date of 14 January 2009 with Champion Recruitment. The Card is dated as issued on 25 March 2009.

29.  The claimant has stated in her letter stamped as received on 21 February 2014 [at page 186 of my documents] that she has only ever worked for three employers as follows:

(a) For Champion Recruitment from 14 January 2009 to 24 September 2010

(b) For Alliance Personnel from 5 October 2010 to 17 December 2010

(c) For Team Support Midlands from 22 December 2010 (no end date is given by the claimant but other submissions seem to accept the end date as 8 April 2011 as shown on a P45).

30.  The claimant has produced three P45s [to be found at pages 238-240 of my documents] as follows:

(a) for a period of employment with Champion Employment ending on 24 September 2010

(b) for a period of employment with Backoffice UK ending on 17 December 2010

(c) for a period of employment with Work Legal-E ending on 9 April 2011.

31.  I am satisfied that the references in paragraph 30(b) and (c) above correspond to the work the claimant has described as set out in paragraph 29(b) and (c). She found work through agencies. The P45s record the agencies; the claimant has recorded where she was placed by the agencies.

32.  Considerable efforts have been made to obtain evidence to show the claimant’s work history. Many payslips have been provided. I set out in an appendix to this decision my analysis of what the evidence in the payslips shows in terms of hours and weeks worked and the earning from the work undertaken.

33.  In the light of this evidence, I accept on the balance of probabilities the dates of employment provided by the claimant and set out in paragraph 29 above.

34.  Even though a payslip for only one week has been provided in respect of the second employment, there is a P45 in respect of this employment which shows total pay in that employment of £1,156.76. I am satisfied on the basis of the claimant’s own evidence supported by the payslip and the P45 that she worked in this employment for the period she has stated.

35.  The significant finding from my detailed analysis of the payslips which the claimant has provided is that the claimant has shown that she worked continuously in employment the subject of the Workers Registration Certificate she has produced for more than one year from the date of the Registration Card, namely 24 March 2009. There are some weeks in the relevant period for which there are no pay slips, but I conclude that these related either to holidays or to weeks in which the claimant did no work—or possibly simply missing payslips. I do not consider that such gaps are there may be in relation to employment obtained through Champion Recruitment break the continuity of her employment through this recruitment agency.

36.  The claimant is therefore to be considered an A8 worker no longer subject to restrictions from late March 2010. The Secretary of State now accepts that this is the case [see submission at pages 145-6 of my documents]. This alters the status of the claimant in a very significant way. She plainly became a worker as defined in Article 45 TFEU entitled to all the rights attaching to that status.

37.  A form HRT WE-Form V12 dated 19 March 2012 has now been produced which indicates that the claimant was claiming income support as a lone parent.

38.  There is a suggestion that the claimant made a claim for a jobseeker’s allowance some time after she had claimed income support, but I do not consider that this affects my determination as to her status when she made her claim for income support on 19 March 2012, save perhaps that it would reinforce a conclusion that the claimant had not withdrawn from the labour market.

The effect of the decision in TG v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PC) [2015] UKUT 50 (AAC)

39.  In TG v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, Judge Ward ruled that the extension of the Workers Registration Scheme applicable to A8 nationals in 2009 was not compatible with European Union law since it was a disproportionate exercise of the Government’s powers under the Treaty of Accession (see paragraphs 69-121 of the decision).

40.  I have concluded that the claimant met the requirements of the scheme on the basis that its extension was not unlawful. The claimant’s position is the same as at the date of her claim for income support which is under appeal either on the application of the scheme, or on the basis that the extension of the scheme was unlawful. I did not therefore consider it necessary to invite further observations of the parties in the light of the decision in TG v Secretary of State.

Did the claimant have a right to reside in March 2012 when she claimed income support?

41.  In order to determine whether the claimant had a right to reside when she made her claim for income support, it is necessary to consider her status following the ending of her employment in April 2011.

42.  I have not been told why that particular employment came to an end. I am therefore proceeding on the basis that it was because there was no work for the claimant.

43.  In such circumstances, it would seem that the claimant became involuntarily unemployed. I so find. She subsequently claimed and was awarded a jobseeker’s allowance. Did this mean that, at this time, she retained her status as a worker under Article 45 TFEU in accordance with the provisions of Article 7(3)(b) of the Citizenship Directive?

44.  There are three conditions which need to be satisfied for a person to gain the benefit of retaining worker status under Article 7(3)(b) of the Citizenship Directive:

·           the claimant must be in involuntary unemployment after having been employed for more than one year; and

·            that involuntary unemployment must be duly recorded; and

·           the claimant must have registered as a job-seeker with the relevant employment office.

45.  Was the claimant in involuntarily unemployment after having been employed for more than one year? If all her employments are aggregated, then she would meet this condition, but if the relevant employment is the employment which has just ended, then that employment was of short duration. On the balance of probabilities I have made a finding of fact that it lasted from 22 December 2010 to 8 April 2011.

46.  In this case, there was a break of around two weeks between the claimant’s first and second jobs, and a break of four days between her second and third jobs. I do not regard these periods as sufficient to preclude a finding that the claimant had been employed for more than one year. That would, for me, be a disproportionate approach to the interpretation of Article 7(3)(b). I note that Article 7(3)(b) does not state that the citizen of the Union must have been continuously employed in a single employment.

47.  I addressed the issue of delay between the end of a period of employment and claiming a jobseeker’s allowance in Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v MK (IS) [2013] UKUT 163 (AAC).  In that case, I said:

69. I have concluded that where there is delay of more than a very few days between the end of employment and the completion of the formalities required to take the benefit of Article 7(3)(b) of the Citizenship Directive, the proper approach is to ask whether, having regard to all the circumstances of the case, there has been undue delay in meeting the requirements of the Citizenship Directive. I believe that an approach which focuses on undue delay is likely to be more easily and more consistently applied by decision makers and tribunals than a requirement for prompt completion of the requirements.

48.  I have made a finding of fact that the claimant’s third employment ended on 8 April 2011. There was therefore a delay between then and 16 May 2011 when a jobseeker’s allowance was claimed.

49.  The claimant’s representative has this to say about the delay [at page 124 of the documents I have]:

10. From 10/04/2011 to 13/05/2011, [the claimant] was in the hope of a new job offer being made by the agency and thus did not make any social welfare benefit claim despite being eligible to claim Jobseekers Allowance (JSA). [The claimant] has informed us that following the termination of her work, between the periods 10/04/2011 to 13/05/2011, she was able to live off the remainder of her savings.

11. As nothing had transpired from the agency, on the 13/05/2011, our client had no option but to sign on for JSA. … .

50.  The claimant herself, in her letter stamped as received by the Upper Tribunal on 21 February 2014 [page 186 of the documents I have] said:

During the period between the end of employment and registering at Job Centre I did not work, I was waiting for work (I was already pregnant and there was no work for me) … .

51.  In these circumstances and in the face of a delay of around five weeks, I would not regard there as being undue delay in making the claim for a jobseeker’s allowance. The claimant acted promptly when it became apparent that there was no further work for her from the agency. I also note in passing that Easter Sunday in 2011 fell on 24 April, so the period of delay included the Easter weekend.

52.  The result is that the claimant as at May 2011 retained her status as a worker under Article 45 TFEU in accordance with the provisions in Article 7(3)(b) of the Citizenship Directive.

53.  Under Article 7(3)(b) of the Citizenship Directive, there is no indication of the duration for which a person continues to be treated as a worker. My interpretation is that the period of retention of the status is open-ended though not forever more. I justify this in part by the provision in Article 7(3)(c) of the Citizenship Directive which limits the period of retention of the status to “no less than six months” where the period of employment is less than a year.

54.  The claimant retained her worker status in April 2011 and claimed income support in March 2012. That is a period of less than a year. If a person falling within Article 7(3)(b) is able to retain the status of worker for no less than six months, then it seems to me to be eminently reasonable to conclude that there is no difficulty in a person retaining worker status under Article 7(3)(b) of the Citizenship Directive for a year in the absence of some intervening event which indicates that the person has withdrawn from the labour market entirely.

55.  I therefore need to consider whether the period during which the claimant was in receipt of a maternity allowance is such an event. I invited the parties to make observations on the nature of maternity allowance in the following terms:

Do the parties accept that MA is a benefit connected with work in the sense that it is designed to provide for a person who has been in work income maintenance for a period connected with child birth during which the mother may not be able to earn from employment or self employment by reason of her pregnancy, or is permitted to refrain from work? I observe that a beneficiary of MA may be disqualified from MA if she without good cause fails to take due care of her health.

56.  Only the representative for the Secretary of State has responded to this invitation, and has done so in the following terms:

… it is accepted that MA is a benefit connected with work as claimants are required to satisfy employment and earnings conditions. It is not about permitting a person to refrain from work. It is income maintenance for a period connected with childbirth.

57.  Nothing in that response causes me to conclude that the claimant had, in some way, abandoned her retained worker status during the period when she was in receipt of maternity allowance. It also seems to me wrong in principle to argue that the mere fact of claiming income support in the claimant’s circumstances indicated the abandonment of retained worker status; that would seem to defeat the objective of Article 7(3)(b) in providing for the retention of the status in the overall context of the right flowing from citizenship of the Union. Indeed, I am told by the claimant’s representative in the final observations on the appeal that the claimant remained registered with the employment agencies as available for work once her circumstances permitted this (letter dated 22 January 2015).

58.  I am accordingly led to the conclusion that the claimant enjoyed retained worker status when she claimed income support in March 2012 when her maternity allowance ended. In my view, she was entitled, by reason of that status, to be treated in the same way as a United Kingdom national in the same position in accordance with Article 7(2) of Regulation 492/2011 which provides:

[A worker who is a national of a Member State] shall enjoy the same social and tax advantages as national workers.

59.  It is well established that this provision includes equal access to social security benefits: R(IS) 4/98 and R(IS) 12/98 which concerned the identical predecessor provision in Article 7(2) of Regulation 1612/68. This position is reinforced by Article 24 of the Citizenship Directive.

60.  Through this somewhat labyrinthine route, I conclude that the claimant has a right to reside as a person with retained worker status as at the date of her claim for income support.

61.  In all the circumstances of this case, I also find that the claimant was, at the date of her claim for income support, habitually resident in the United Kingdom. She had established her home here, had a child, and had worked for some considerable period and paid taxes. Her life was settled in the United Kingdom. She is accordingly not to be treated as a person from abroad.

62.  The Secretary of State must now determine her entitlement on the claim made on 19 March 2012.

63.  My formal decision in substitution of that of the tribunal is set out at the top of this decision.

 

 

 

Signed on the original Robin C A White

on 18 March 2015 Judge of the Upper Tribunal

 

 

Appendix

Evidence from payslips produced by the claimant relating to work she did between

1 February 2009 and 8 April 2011: blanks merely indicate weeks for which there are no individual payslips

Pay date	Employer	Hours	Net pay	Page ref for evidence
21/01/2009	Champion	12.00	£57.60	155 & 209
28/01/2009	Champion	36.00	£160.54	154 & 189
04/02/2009	Champion	12.00	£57.60	154 & 190
11/02/2009	Champion	12.00	£57.60	154 & 190
18/02/2009	Champion	48.00	£210.22	156 & 188
25/02/2009
04/03/2009
11/03/2009	Champion	24.00	£283.66	156 & 189
18/03/2009	Champion	20.00	£118.30	156 & 189
25/03/2009	Champion	48.00	£267.82	157 & 187
01/04/2009	Champion	2.50	£15.00	157 & 188
08/04/2009	Champion	36.00	£186.09	155 & 190
15/04/2009	Champion	24.00	£136.41	157 & 188
22/04/2009	Champion	12.00	£82.40	152 & 193
29/04/2009
06/05/2009	Champion	60.00	£285.45	153 & 191
13/05/2009	Champion	72.00	£334.93	153 & 192
20/05/2009	Champion	40.00	£202.65	153 & 191
27/05/2009	Champion	96.00	£438.42	152 & 192
03/06/2009	Champion	56.00	£268.89	152 & 192
10/06/2009	Champion	56.00	£268.80	151 & 193
17/06/2009	Champion	56.00	£268.69	151 & 194
24/06/2009
01/07/2009
07/07/2009	Champion	40.00	£202.65	155
14/07/2009
21/07/2009
28/07/2009
05/08/2009	Champion	56.00	£268.69	151 & 193
12/08/2009	Champion	48.00	£235.77	150 & 194
19/08/2009	Champion	56.00	£268.89	150 & 194
26/08/2009	Champion	56.00	£268.69	150 & 195
02/09/2009	Champion	48.00	£235.77	149 & 196
09/09/2009	Champion	52.00	£252.33	147 & 196
16/09/2009	Champion	44.00	£219.01	149 & 195
23/09/2009	Champion	40.00	£202.65	149 & 195
30/09/2009	Champion	40.00	£202.45	147 & 197
07/10/2009	Champion	32.00	£169.53	147 & 196
14/10/2009	Champion	56.00	£268.89	148 & 197
21/10/2009	Champion	50.00	£285.25	148 & 198
28/10/2009	Champion	52.00	£252.33	148 & 197
04/11/2009	Champion	48.67	£238.35	145 & 198
11/11/2009	Champion	48.72	£238.85	145 & 199
18/11/2009	Champion	48.12	£236.27	145 & 198
25/11/2009	Champion	16.00	£101.60	146 & 199
02/12/2009
09/12/2009	Champion	35.83	£210.28	146 & 200
16/12/2009	Champion	16.00	£211.35	144 & 200
23/12/2009	Champion	24.00	£136.21	146 & 199
30/12/2009	Champion	8.00	£33.12	144 & 200
06/01/2010
13/01/2010	Champion	40.00	£252.45	159 & 206
20/01/2010	Champion	32.00	£169.53	144 & 201
27/01/2010	Champion	48.00	£235.57	143 & 201
03/02/2010	Champion	41.00	£210.05	143 & 201
10/02/2010	Champion	28.00	£152.75	143 & 202
17/02/2010	Champion	40.00	£202.65	140 & 202
24/02/2010	Champion	20.00	£119.85	140 & 202
03/03/2010	Champion	40.00	£202.45	140 & 203
10/03/2010	Champion	40.00	£202.65	142 & 203
17/03/2010	Champion	44.00	£219.21	141 & 204
24/03/2010	Champion	40.00	£202.45	141 & 205
31/03/2010	Champion	56.00	£268.85	142 & 203
07/04/2010	Champion	40.00	£202.65	142 & 204
14/04/2010	Champion	48.00	£235.77	159 & 205
21/04/2010	Champion	32.00	£169.30	141 & 204
28/04/2010	Champion	40.00	£202.65	159 & 205
05/05/2010	Champion	40.00	£202.65	158 & 206
12/05/2010	Champion	48.00	£235.57	158 & 206
19/05/2010	Champion	48.00	£235.77	158 & 207
26/05/2010	Champion	40.00	£202.45	160 & 207
02/06/2010	Champion	40.00	£202.65	162 & 209
09/06/2010	Champion	40.00	£202.65	161 & 208
16/06/2010	Champion	40.00	£202.45	160 & 208
23/06/2010	Champion	40.00	£202.65	161 & 209
30/06/2010	Champion	40.00	£202.45	161 & 208
07/07/2010	Champion	40.00	£202.65	191
14/07/2010	Champion	40.00	£202.65	160 & 207
21/07/2010	Champion	40.00	£202.45	163 & 221
30/07/2010	Champion	40.00	£202.65	164 & 220
04/08/2010	Champion	40.00	£202.45	165 & 217
11/08/2010	Champion	32.00	£203.23	166 & 219
20/08/2010	Champion	24.00	£202.65	167 & 218
25/08/2010	Champion	24.00	£202.65	168 & 214
03/09/2010	Champion	32.00	£169.33	169 & 213
10/09/2010	Champion	32.00	£169.53	170 & 211
17/09/2010	Champion	32.00	£169.53	172 & 212
24/09/2010	Champion	32.00	£169.53	173 & 210
01/10/2010	Champion		£482.14	174 & 215
08/10/2010	Champion	8.00	£33.12	171 & 216
16/12/2010	Alliance (Birmingham)	40.00	£213.43	175 & 231
07/01/2011	Legal E	11.00	£65.23	54, 176 & 222
14/01/2011	Legal E	16.00	£94.88	55, 177 & 223
21/01/2011	Legal E	14.75	£87.47	56, 178 & 224
28/01/2011
04/02/2011	Legal E	32.00	£188.01	57, 179 & 225
11/02/2011	Legal E	8.00	£47.44	58, 180 & 226
18/02/2011	Legal E	19.00	£112.38	59, 181 & 227
25/02/2011	Legal E	16.00	£214.94	60, 182 & 228
04/03/2011	Legal E	23.00	£134.64	61, 183 & 229
11/03/2011
18/03/2011
25/03/2011
02/04/2011
08/04/2011	Legal E	25.00	£146.24	62, 184 and 230