What are the possibilities for facing the right steps in the building inspection process?
Mr T was wrongly awarded sickness benefit, followed by invalidity benefit and incapacity benefit, when he was released from prison in 1994. The mistake was not discovered until April 1998 and then not put right until November 1999. Mr T was not notified in advance that his incapacity benefit was to cease. His subsequent claim to income support was mishandled so that he repeatedly had to collect replacement giro cheques from his local office.
Strata Inspection Report At one stage his local authority was wrongly notified that his income support has ceased and they stopped his council tax and housing benefit. After the Ombudsman’s intervention, the Benefits Agency sorted out Mr T’s national insurance position, awarded him a consolatory payment of £100 and decided not to seek recovery of the overpaid benefit. Mr P was interviewed by two Benefits Agency (BA) fraud investigators in March 1997. His jobseeker’s allowance was withdrawn and he was without benefit from 26 February to 21 April 1997.
Mr P’s solicitors in April that they had been seeking to interview a different Mr P, and the solicitors asked BA to compensate him for their mistake. The Ombudsman criticised BA for not replying to the request for compensation, and for failing to ensure that the fraud investigators had followed recommended practice in keeping records of their investigations. After the Ombudsman’s intervention BA awarded Mr P national insurance credits for the period when he had not received benefit.
In April 1997 Mr F, a member of the European Union, entered the UK and submitted claims for both contributions and income-based jobseeker’s allowance. Benefits Agency (BA) referred his claim to their Pensions and Overseas Directorate who later advised that Mr F’s claim could not be enhanced with contributions paid abroad. Mr F subsequently alleged that, at his initial interview, he had been told that his benefit would be enhanced. When BA considered Mr F’s complaint they refused to make a payment for financial loss and effectively ignored his assertion that there had been a witness to the alleged misdirection.