YH v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (IS) (Income support and state pension credit : other: income support : Quistclose principle)

Decision: � The decision of the First-tier Tribunal given on 30 th April 2014 contained an error on a point of law.� Accordingly, I allow the claimant�s appeal and I set aside the tribunal�s decision.� In exercise of the power given by s.12(2)(b) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 I remit the case to the First-tier Tribunal.

1.�������� The claimant claimed and was awarded income support from 5 th April 2007.� It appears that he had previously been in receipt of income support for the period 24 th September 2003 to 1 st March 2007.� In 2012 the Department for Work and Pensions became aware that on 1 st December 2006 the claimant had mortgaged his property and had received an advance originally believed to be in the sum of �39,433.25.� Very shortly thereafter the claimant paid the proceeds of the advance to his three sons.� As a result of the discovery of those facts:

(1)������� on 11 th January 2013 the decision maker decided that the claimant was to be treated as having the capital raised by the mortgage on the ground that by giving it to his sons he had deprived himself of it for the purposes of reg. 51 of the Income Support (General) Regulations 1987, S.I. 1987 No. 1967;

(2)������� on 14 th March 2013 the decision maker decided that as a result the claimant had been overpaid a sum of �33,118.40 in respect of income support.

2.�������� The claimant appealed against both those decisions.� Further documents were produced from which it became clear that the original advance was in the sum of �70,000.� As a result, the amount of the overpayment was recalculated as being �51,162.� The tribunal hearing the appeal against the overpayment decision was requested to substitute the new amount.