Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber)

---

You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) >> NSP v Stoke-on-Trent City Council & GP (HB) (Housing and council tax benefits - recovery of overpayments, Revisions, supersessions and reviews - ignorance of material fact) [2022] UKUT 86 (AAC) (17 March 2022)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/AAC/2022/86.html
Cite as: [2022] UKUT 86 (AAC)

---

[New search] [Contents list] [Printable PDF version] [Help]

---

NSP v Stoke-on-Trent City Council & GP (HB) [2022] UKUT 86 (AAC) (17 March 2022)

The "material fact" referred to in regulation 101(2)(b) of the Housing Benefit Regulations 2006 is a fact that actually did make a difference to the outcome decision and not one that might have done so. In other words, it is a material fact that either formed, or could have formed, a ground for the revising or superseding decision that led to the overpayment.

As is the case for benefits administered by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and in the child support scheme, a "material" fact for the purposes of regulation 4 (Revision of decisions) and regulation 7 (Decisions superseding earlier decisions) of the Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2001 is one that actually does make a difference to the outcome decision and not one that might have done so: CIS/3655/2007 and CA v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and TB (CSM) [2020] UKUT 205 (AAC) followed.

A HTML version of this file is not available click here or view below the pdf version : [2022] UKUT 86 (AAC)