Guidance

LA Welfare Direct 11/20

Updated 11 December 2020

Contact

If you have queries about the:

• technical content of this bulletin then contact details are given at the end of each article

• general content and distribution of this bulletin, contact lawelfare.correspondence@dwp.gov.uk

Who should read

All Housing Benefit staff.

Action

For information.

Editorial

Hi, Darren here this time around. I’m going to keep this brief as there’s plenty to digest in this month’s edition.

I do want to reflect a little on what isn’t included in here though. Firstly, I know you and your teams may feel like you are in the eye of the storm at present. With normal business to conduct whilst still operating remotely for the large part, further impacts from local and regional lockdowns, launching the Housing Benefit (HB) Award Accuracy Initiative (for those participating) and now administering NHS Test and Trace Support Payments in England with devolved schemes following suit.

I’ve personally been involved in supporting the data sharing and communications for this last scheme and I can say that the local authorities (LAs) I’ve talked to are doing their utmost to deliver this as effectively as possible despite the challenges faced. We will continue to support you as best we can on this.

Secondly in terms of support, we’ve all had to change the way we work this last year and I’m keen that we do our part to ensure the support we offer you is flexible to adapt to the ever evolving situation we currently face. For instance, offering focussed local authority (LA) Engagement Event calls – we’ve had two now, both well attended and with positive feedback. These events are for you, so please let us know what topics you’d like to see covered on upcoming calls.

And if you have any other suggestions or requests as to how we engage and support you please just email me at darren.baker1@dwp.gov.uk – I can’t promise to say yes to everything but I am more than happy to listen and consider.

Thanks,

Darren Baker
Head of Change and Communications
Fraud, Error and Debt Team
Local Authority Partnership Engagement and Delivery (LA-PED) division

Additional Housing Benefit Award Accuracy Initiative: frequently asked questions

1. As well as the frequently asked questions included in circular HB A9/2020, LAWD9/2020 and Annex C of LAWD10/2020, we’ve received some further questions about Full Case Reviews which we believe all LAs would benefit from seeing the answers to. These are included in Annex A.

2. If you have any further questions about the HB Award Accuracy Initiative, you can contact lawelfare.frauderrordebt@dwp.gov.uk

Scottish Child Payment

3. The Scottish Government has introduced a system of Scottish Child Payment. Payment will be £10 a week to low income families for each eligible child, with no cap on the number of children in families. Payments will be monthly.

4. Applications, payments and disputes will be administered by Social Security Scotland.

5. The Social Security (Scotland) Act 2018 (Information-Sharing and Scottish Child Payment) (Consequential Provision and Modifications) Order 2020 (SI 2020/482) which bring in the Scottish Child Payments comes into force on 9 November 2020.

Impact on HB

6. Scottish Child Payments are not prescribed as income for the purposes of the Housing Benefit (persons who have attained the qualifying age for state pension credit) Regulations 2006 and so should be disregarded. The payments are also disregarded as capital.

Extension to the Social Security (Coronavirus)(Prisoners) Amendment Regulations 2020

7. In circular HB A8/2020, we advised you that the Social Security (Coronavirus) (Prisoners) Regulations 2020 (SI 2020/409) made changes to Regulation 7 of the Housing Benefit Regulations 2006 and the Housing Benefit (persons who have attained the qualifying age for state pension credit) Regulations 2006.

8. The effect of the change was that prisoners on temporary release could be treated as if they are not prisoners and therefore allow them to claim HB, subject to them meeting the usual conditions of entitlement to HB.

9. This amendment was due to expire 8 months from 13 March 2020, in other words, in November 2020. However, the Social Security (Coronavirus)(Prisoners) Amendment Regulations 2020 (SI 2020/1156), which were laid on 22 October 2020, change the date the amendment will expire. The amendment will now expire 14 months from March 2020. The Statutory Instrument 2020/1156 comes into force on 12 November 2020.

New information and tool for Universal Credit claimants

10. There is now new information and a tool for Universal Credit (UC) claimants to help them understand any debts and deductions taken from their UC payments.

11. LAs should encourage any claimants that approach you about debts and deductions from UC payments that are not related to HB debts to use the information and tool.

New measures to improve standards and quality in supported housing

12. On Tuesday 20 October 2020, the Minister for Rough Sleeping and Housing (Kelly Tolhurst) announced new measures to improve oversight for supported housing.

13. The supported housing: national statement of expectations sets out the government’s vision for standards, quality and value for money in supported housing and how this can be achieved bringing together best practice across the sector.

14. The government also announced £3 million to fund supported housing oversight pilots in five council areas – Birmingham, Blackburn, Blackpool, Bristol and Hull – to improve quality, enforcement, and value for money in supported housing, focusing on short-term supported accommodation. The pilots will run until the end of March 2021.

15. The supported housing pilots will involve collaborative working between local partners and will carefully test different approaches to greater oversight of the sector and how standards could be enforced. The pilots are intended to improve quality of non-commissioned provision in priority areas.

16. These measures are an important step in improving quality and oversight in the sector. Until now, there have been no definitive guidelines on what should reasonably be expected from accommodation within supported housing. These pilots will also help us better understand the barriers LAs face administering specified accommodation claims.

Clarification to the new debt letter rules

17. In October’s LAWD10/2020 lite we highlighted that HM Treasury is proposing new rules to amend letters that borrowers receive from their lenders when they are seriously behind on repayments, so they will be easier to understand and less intimidating.

18. This information was shared to highlight other things that are going on in the debt space. It was not intended to imply that this is related to HB overpayment letters or any other council debt that is not a loan. However, LAs may choose to review their letters in line with any new guidance once published.

Invitation to the next Data sharing and IT issues consultation and engagement forum

19. The data sharing and IT issues consultation and engagement forum is open to representatives from the whole LA community.

20. The next forum will be held on Thursday 3 December from 2pm to 3pm. The dial-in instructions are as follows:

• dial 020 3481 3254
• enter the participant code 4452918#
• you will then be kept in a holding area, listening to background music, until the call properly starts at 2pm
• your line will be muted but instructions will be given should you want to ask a question during the call
• do aim to dial in 2 or 3 minutes before the start time, as we aim to start the call promptly

21. The agenda will be as follows:

• a 15 minute introduction from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), covering projects recently delivered and currently in delivery, insight into future planned projects, as well as the most recent common issues that have been reported to us
• 15 to 20 minutes of questions from LAs on the call about the projects and matters covered in the introduction
• 15 minutes of questions from LAs about any other data sharing issues or IT issues they face
• 10 to 15 minutes focused on suggestions from LAs about future data sharing, data matching or automation projects that DWP could consider funding and delivering

22. We will produce high level minutes of the forum, specifically focusing on the questions asked and the answers given, and publish them on Glasscubes and the LA Welfare Direct.

23. We would really like every LA to have at least one representative dial into the forum. We ask that those dialling in:

• seek input and feedback from as many of their colleagues as possible prior to the call regarding questions they might want to ask
• have knowledge, at least at a high level, about data sharing, data matching and current IT topic areas
• feed back to their colleagues about how the conference call went, including the answers to the questions asked

24. We look forward to your participation on the call.

If you have any questions ahead of the call, please contact the local authority data sharing (LADS) team at lawelfare.ladsdeliveryteam@dwp.gov.uk

Secondment opportunity in Housing Policy Division

25. Working with LAs as one of our major stakeholders in welfare reform continues to feature heavily and for this reason we value the expertise and knowledge that LA HB experts can bring to the team.

26. An opportunity has arisen for an LA secondee to join Housing Policy Division (HPD). HPD are responsible for the maintenance and development of policy for HB and Housing support within UC. Our work involves developing, designing and implementing new policy initiatives as well as existing policies.

27. The LA secondee will work on a mixture of high profile policy areas, including HB, Housing support in UC, Managed Payment to Landlord policy and supported accommodation.

28. It will involve liaising with internal and external delivery partners on cross cutting work, utilising their skills to inform and advise ministers. In addition, they will develop guidance and draft high quality replies to parliamentary questions and freedom of information requests, which will need to be composed in a tight time frame to ensure compliance with Parliamentary standards.

Personal requirements

29. Candidates should possess the following:

• good understanding of HB procedures and regulations
• good drafting and communication skills
• ability to build and maintain effective working relationships with LAs and other stakeholders
• ability to work with people at different levels in the organisation and to work as part of a team to achieve results
• ability to deliver work at pace and with successful, quantifiable outcomes

Further information

30. The secondment is offered for an initial period of 6 months which will be extended until January 2022 if all parties (the individual, their LA and DWP) are happy to do so.

31. The post is offered on a full-time basis but we are prepared to offer some flexibility to secure the right candidate.

32. Due to coronavirus (COVID-19), the candidate will initially be expected to work from home. However, when the current climate changes, the candidate may be expected to attend one of our policy ‘hubs’ in Sheffield, Leeds or London. Neither travelling expenses or a move at public expense can be considered.

33. If you are keen to undertake this role and are at S01/S02/SO3 (roughly equates up to £31,000 a year) please:

• firstly, check with your LA that you could be released
• send your CV or email your interest to joanne.hawkins1@dwp.gov.uk

Publication of HB speed of processing statistics

34. DWP published HB speed of processing (SoP) statistics and associated data for quarter 1 (Q1) in 2020 to 2021 (April to June 2020) on Wednesday 28 October 2020.

Some key points

• during quarter 1 of 2020 to 2021 there were 0.1 million new HB claims and 2.5 million change of circumstances to existing HB claims processed in Great Britain

• for new HB claims there has been a decrease of 1,200 (1%) since the last quarter and a decrease of 9,400 (9%) since Q1 in 2019 to 2020

• for change of circumstances to existing HB claims there has been a decrease of 2.1 million (45%) since the last quarter and a decrease of 65,000 (3%) since Q1 in 2019 to 2020

New Claims

• the average time taken to process a new HB claim during Q1 2020 to 2021 was 18 calendar days
• this is one day lower than in the same quarter in 2019 to 2020 and one day higher than Q4 in 2019 to 2020

Change of Circumstances

• the average number of days taken to process a change of circumstance to an existing HB claim during Q1 in 2020 to 2021 was 5 calendar days

• this is one day lower than in the same quarter in 2019 to 2020 and 2 days higher than Q4 in 2019 to 2020

To note

35. The data in this release should be seen in context with operational emergency measures, policy changes and easements due to coronavirus (COVID-19).

HB decisions by the Upper Tribunal

36. Decision Making and Appeals (DMA) Leeds is aware of the following HB cases that have been decided by the Upper Tribunal (UT):

• CH/19/20: Removal of Spare Room Subsidy (RSRS): Size criteria – Remit
• CH/3284/17: Houseboat: Continuous cruiser licence fee falls within the meaning of ‘rent’
• CH/4929/14 and CH/4950/14: RSRS: LA appeal upheld – Carmichael followed
• CH/4951/14 and CH/4952/14: RSRS: LA appeal dismissed – Carmichael followed
• CH/819/15: RSRS: Remit – Carmichael followed
• CH/2654/17 and CH/3899/14: RSRS: Secretary of State appeal upheld – Carmichael followed
• CH/2242/19: Income from Ill Health Income Plan could not be disregarded

37. A selection of decisions of the UT are published on their website. Do be aware that there is an undefined time lapse between decisions being issued and their appearance on the website.

38. If you have any queries about cases before the UT Judges or courts, please contact us by email at quarryhouse.dmaleedscustomersupportservices@dwp.gov.uk

New Legislation

39. Copies of Statutory Instruments that have been laid can be downloaded.

What’s new on our HB pages on GOV.UK

40. The following items can be found on the website link shown:

LAWD 10/2020

Link: LAWD 10/2020

• Editorial

• Discretionary Housing Payments mid-year monitoring return 20-21 by Thursday

• Personal Details Verification Report: Updated version of CIS500 template and user instructions

• Reminder: How to return Housing Benefit Matching Service LA management information to DWP

• HB Award Accuracy Initiative relaunch: Update and further all-LA telephone Conference

• Changes to Local Authority Partnership, Engagement and Delivery division generic email addresses

• Decisions with the Upper Tribunal

• New Legislation

• What’s new on our HB pages on GOV.UK

• How to complete the HBMS MI spreadsheet

• Result codes Annex A

• Further HB Award Accuracy Initiative frequently asked questions Annex B

• New LA-PED division generic email addresses Annex C

• DHP mid-year monitoring return template 2020-21 attached as a separate Appendix A

• CIS500 template attached as a separate Appendix B

• CIS500 user instructions attached as a separate Appendix C

• Examples of completed HBMS MI spreadsheets attached as a separate Appendix D

LAWD10lite/2020

Link: LAWD lite 10/2020

• Closing outstanding and dormant interventions of systems and the impact on management information

• New debt letter rules

Circular HB S9/2020

Link: Circular HB S9/2020

• Housing Benefit Award Accuracy Initiative funding for English, Scottish and Welsh local authorities 2020 to 2021

Annex A: Additional HB Award Accuracy frequently asked questions

Question 1

Q1: How do I handle cases that might be duplicated on both the High Priority Risk file (Full Case Reviews) and the Housing Benefit Matching Service (HBMS)/Self Employment Review (SER) file?

A1: Ultimately, this will depend on the chronology of when you commence/record fraud and error detection intervention activity.

Case 1: Receipt of high priority risk case (Full Case Review) and HBMS/SER case on the same monthly download of HB Award Accuracy data – Full Case Review activity commenced.

If you commence a Full Case Review (FCR), then in all likelihood, you will encompass any further intelligence from HBMS/SER referral as part of that review. Any HB adjustment and resulting over/underpayment should be attributed solely against that review. It is not necessary to apportion any aspect of the over/underpayment recorded under the FCR to an HBMS/SER referral, as ultimately this would result in double counting.

However, you will still need to record an outcome against the HBMS/SER referral on the HBMS MI spreadsheet to clear it. Column N should be completed using Code 4Z.

Code 4Z

Case already under investigation prior to receiving the HBMS data match.

The LA was already investigating the case before receiving the HBMS referral.

In these cases, enter the date you commenced your investigation in Column O – this should be prior to the HBMS ‘Date of Match’.

Column O is then completed with the date you commenced the investigation which should be prior to the ‘Date of Match’ recorded in Column C. Of course if you commenced the FCR following receipt of the monthly High Priority Risk file, which also contained the HBMS/SER referral files, then the commencement date of the FCR date will be later than the ‘Date of Match’ in Column C of the HBMS MI spreadsheet.

In such cases LAs are asked to input the day prior to the ‘Date of Match’ in Column C within Column O, to ensure the HBMS MI spreadsheet doesn’t reject when received by DWP.

Case 2 - Receipt of high priority risk case (FCR) and HBMS/SER case on the same monthly download of HB Award Accuracy data. HBMS/SER activity commenced.

If you have already commenced fraud and error detection activity on a HBMS/SER referral, then discover a duplicate record on the High Priority Risk Report, you should decide whether to either:

• continue with the HBMS/SER activity until an outcome is reached ensuring the HBMS MI Spreadsheet in completed in line with guidance, or
• commence an FCR (in effect suspending further activity on the HBMS/SER referral) and take action to clear the HBMS/SER referral on the HBMS MI spreadsheet in line with action outlined in Case 1 above

Case 3: Receipt of HBMS/SER Case and an FCR has commenced or been completed as a result of a High Priority Risk case being notified on a previous month’s file

The LA will need to consider whether the information provided on the HBMS/SER referral provides sufficient information to contradict the accuracy of the HB reassessment undertaken as part of the previous FCR. If so, then the LA should commence activity on the HBMS/SER referral and record any outcome on the HBMS MI Spreadsheet in line with guidance. If not, then the HBMS/SER referral should be cleared by completion of Column N (4Z Code) and Column O.

In this scenario the date you commenced the investigation, input within Column O, should always be prior to the ‘Date of Match’ recorded in Column C.

Case 4: Receipt of high priority risk case and an HBMS/SER referral has commenced or been completed as a result of the case being notified on a previous month’s file

LAs have flexibility to consider the appropriateness of undertaking an FCR on a High Priority Risk case, taking into account previous intervention activity on the case. It will therefore be up to the LA to decide on the value of undertaking an additional FCR intervention in such cases.

If the LA doesn’t undertake an FCR on the case and it finds that it doesn’t have sufficient marked high priority risk cases to meet its communicated volumetric expectation, then it should select a case with the next highest risk score from the risk file for consideration of FCR activity.

Question 2

Q2: How do I undertake HB Award Accuracy FCRs for supported accommodation claims?

A2: A number of LAs have highlighted that a large proportion of their high risk cases that require an FCR (top 400,000 high risk cases nationally) are UC recipients. These UC HB cases are mainly supported accommodation cases where the UC payment covers the living costs and rental liability is covered by HB. LAs are seeking advice as to whether these types of cases should still be subject to an HB Award Accuracy FCR and count towards the Initiative activities.

The analysis used to develop the HB Award Accuracy risk model shows that although supported accommodation cases are usually single occupancy households on UC/passported benefit, they are two to three times more likely to have an HB termination. That, coupled with high benefit awards associated with these types of cases, results in a high risk score.

However, the objective of undertaking an HB Award Accuracy FCR is to identify an unreported change of circumstance. The risk model does not take account of recent actions the LA may have taken to review the case or any action planned in the near future. Therefore, for the remainder of 2020 to 2021 we are giving LAs flexibility and discretion to decide which cases they believe it is worth undertaking an FCR, subject to certain parameters.

The aim of the HB Award Accuracy Initiative is for the LA to undertake at least one FCR on a case within a 12 month period. Although the Initiative for 2020 to 2021 only covers 4 to 6 months, depending on the go-live date each LA chose, this principle still applies. When deciding whether or not to undertake an HB Award Accuracy FCR on a supported accommodation case, the LA should consider whether a FCR has already been completed within the last 12 months or whether one is planned within the next few months. Additionally, some LAs may elect to schedule reviews to coincide with known rent increases or when other changes are due to be made and decide it is sensible to undertake a review at that point.

If an HB Award Accuracy FCR has not been undertaken within the previous 10 to 12 months, and no review is scheduled, we would expect LAs to undertake an HB Award Accuracy FCR. If it was only one or two months ago since the LA undertook an FCR, or the LA has robust arrangements in place to pick up tenancy changes, the probability of picking up a termination or change is unlikely and it would almost certainly not be worth doing an HB Award Accuracy FCR again. In these circumstances the LA should proceed to the next highest risk case where the probability of identifying an unreported change will be higher.

Ultimately, it is an LA’s decision whether or not to undertake HB Award Accuracy FCRs on supported accommodation cases. However, it is important that such decisions should be made on an informed basis with the aim of identifying as many unreported changes as possible.

Question 3

Q3: How do I correctly record specific intervention outcomes from HB Award Accuracy FCRs when the outcome includes a mix of changes to the existing live benefit award and/or potential multiple historic overpayments/underpayments?

A3: We have received a number of queries from LAs seeking advice on how to correctly record specific intervention outcomes from HB Award Accuracy FCRs when the outcome includes a mix of changes to the existing live benefit award and/or potential multiple historic overpayments/underpayments.

The importance of accurate recording of FCR information on front end IT Systems was communicated in circular HB A9/2020 – as this information will be captured by the corresponding SHBE (Single Housing Benefit Extract) fields and used to inform subsequent DWP MI reports. It is imperative that LAs are compliant with their IT supplier guidance in recording information both fully and accurately on the front end IT Systems for activity relating to:

• fraud and error detection
• change
• error

On completion of an HB Award Accuracy FCR, there are a number of potential scenarios to consider for recording the required intervention outcome – outcome of fraud and error detection activity:

• current (‘live’) benefit award increases as a result of the HB Award Accuracy FCR – (with/without a past ‘net’ overpayment or underpayment) – record as code 1 = Benefit increased/earlier underpayment found but no change to live payment
• current (‘live’) benefit award decreases as a result of the HB Award Accuracy FCR – (with/without a past ‘net’ OP or U/P) – record as code 2 = Benefit decreased/earlier overpayment found but no change to live payment

Note: Any change to current (‘live’) benefit award should take precedence in determining outcome recorded. If there is no change to the current benefit award, then identification of overpayment(s) and/or underpayment(s) should determine the classification to use.

• no change to current benefit (‘live’) award as a result of the HB Award Accuracy FCR, but a past (‘net’) underpayment has been identified/occurred – record as code 1 = Benefit increased/earlier underpayment found but no change to live payment

• no change to current benefit (‘live’) award as a result of the HB Award Accuracy FCR, but a past (‘net’) overpayment has been identified/occurred – Record as code 2 = Benefit decreased/earlier overpayment found but no change to live payment

Note: The FCR might potentially identify multiple historic/past overpayments and/or underpayments, so LAs should use a ‘netting’ off approach to determine whether to classify as a majority overpayment (Code 2 – Benefit decreased/earlier overpayment found but no change to live payment) or underpayment (Code 1 – Benefit increased / earlier underpayment found but no change to live payment). If no ‘netting’ applied or impracticable to use, LAs should use ‘larger amount’ to determine whether to classify as overpayment (Code 2 – Benefit decreased/earlier overpayment found but no change to live payment) or underpayment (Code 1 – Benefit increased / earlier underpayment found but no change to live payment).

• no change to current benefit (‘live’) award as a result of the HB AWARD ACCURACY FCR, and no past overpayment(s) nor underpayments have been identified – record code 3 = No change to benefit amount.

SHBE guidance for ‘Outcome of fraud and error detection activity’ field extract:

176: Outcome of fraud and error detection activity – HB:

1 = Benefit increased/earlier underpayment found but no change to live payment

2 = Benefit decreased/earlier overpayment found but no change to live payment

3 = No change to benefit amount

4 = Not known/not recorded

Note: Individual IT Suppliers might have opted not to exactly replicate the numbering/wording of these outcome descriptors in the outcome options – if it is not evident which descriptor applies then you should refer to your IT supplier guidance.

On completion of HB Award Accuracy FCRs that identify a change to current benefit awards and/or overpayments/underpayments, it is also important that LAs follow standard business as usual practice in accordance with their respective IT supplier guidance to capture both change and error (overpayment/underpayment) information, in addition to completing the intervention fields.

If you have any questions regarding the above frequently asked questions you can email lawelfare.frauderrordebt@dwp.gov.uk