Society blog

Talk of the town

8 Feb 12

Some thoughts against the background of the mergers dominating the legal news

2011 reflections

21 Dec 11

The economic outlook remains poor, but other developments await in the coming year

Offer them hope

2 Dec 11

Message needed for the young in troubled times

View from Wick

18 Oct 11

Austin Lafferty's faculty visit to Caithness

ABS lift-off

14 Oct 11

Society wants to share draft handbook with those interested in setting up in Scotland

2020 vision

23 Sep 11

Society's objectives set out for today's SGM

Conference call to action

8 Sep 11

"One Profession" event highlights opportunities in the years ahead

Discrimination: bad for business

1 Jun 11

Society will lead in tackling negative perceptions of the profession by ethnic minority solicitors

Dealing with the new Parliament

12 May 11

Society wants to continue constructive relationship in dealing with legal issues

The AGM and the constitution

17 Mar 11

The constitution could do with updating even as regards participation in the meeting

Editors Blog

Claiming from the needy

2 Mar 09
How much should the Government be able to reclaim when benefit errors are made?

A judge at the High Court in London has ruled that the Government is legally entitled to recover overpayments of social security benefits, although the mistake was the fault of the department and not of the claimant.

Rejecting a test case brought by the Child Poverty Action Group, Deputy Judge Michael Supperstone QC held that a common law power existed to recover money that the claimant was not entitled to receive.

The decision is likely to be appealed, but if it stands - and is applied in Scotland - it could have serious implications for many thousands of individuals and families. Apparently in the 12 months to February 2007, 65,000 letters were sent out seeking to recover overpayments.

Apart from reducing the incentive on officials to get it right in the first place, those who by definition depend on these minimum levels of support will find their entitlement cut back further as long as there is money due to be repaid. No doubt in most cases the claimant will not have had the means or the ability to check the department's calculations, and will have spent the money in good faith.

If it is to insist on recovery, the Government at least has a moral duty to have the extent (i.e. how far back recovery should be allowed) and size of instalments subject to proper external control. Perhaps the fairest way would be a combination of legal limits plus the right on the claimant to ask the appeal tribunal to decide what would be fair in the individual case.

Otherwise the whole purpose of the benefit system as a safety net for the needy is likely to be undermined.

Have your say





FILLER_lawscotjobs (link opens in new window)