Universal Credit Supersessions

This article explains how supersessions work in Universal Credit. The article gives some tactics for getting decisions changed and maximising arrears of benefit in different situations.

Supersessions are one of the ways that Universal Credit (UC) decisions can be changed. This article should be read together with related articles on UC decisions, and other mechanisms for changing decisions: revision, and suspension and termination. A revision is a change to the original decision, which therefore takes effect on the same date that the original decision did.¹ In contrast, a supersession is a new decision which replaces the original decision from a later date. The original decision stays intact, but the benefit award changes from the later date.

The framework for changing decisions through revisions and supersessions is established by The Social Security Act 1998 (“the 1998 Act”). There are further provisions in secondary legislation, which for the purposes of UC is The Universal Credit, Personal Independence Payment, Jobseeker’s Allowance and Employment and Support Allowance (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013 (“the DA Regs”). Under the 1998 Act, decisions are final. This means that once it has been made, a decision can only be changed through specific mechanisms if there are grounds to do so: revision, supersession, suspension and termination, being corrected, or being changed or replaced on appeal.²

If a client has been refused benefit, or hasn’t been awarded the full amount they’re entitled to, you need to know the rules about revisions and supersessions in order to maximise the amount of arrears paid to the client. It’s often particularly important to see if there’s a way to change an earlier decision because of the limited provisions for backdating in Universal Credit.³

When can a decision be superseded?

A supersession is where, rather than a decision being changed, a new decision is made which replaces (supersedes) the earlier decision. In the words of the Advice for Decision Making (ADM) guidance at Chapter A4, “supersession means changing a decision of the decision maker, the First-tier Tribunal or the Upper Tribunal and replacing it, from a later date than the original decision.”⁴

Whereas a revision takes effect from the date the original decision took effect, a supersession is a new decision, so it is important to establish on what date it takes effect. The default position in the 1998 Act is that the supersession will take effect from the date of the client’s application.⁵ In the case of UC this would mean that it takes effect on the first day of the assessment period in which the application for supersession is made.⁶ There are also numerous exceptions to this general rule which will be covered in this article.⁷

Only a decision to award benefit, not a decision to refuse benefit, can be superseded. This is because of the principle in the 1998 Act that a claim for benefit no longer exists after a decision is made.⁸ Case law has confirmed that a refusal of a claim cannot be superseded for a relevant change of circumstances.⁹ As a result, if a UC claim is refused and entitlement only arises due to a later change of circumstances, the client would need to make a new claim.

Applications for a revision can be treated as applications for a supersession, and applications for a supersession can be treated as applications for a revision.¹⁰ This means that the DWP should consider which is the most appropriate way to change the original decision. A decision should always be revised instead of superseded if it is possible to do so.¹¹ If the client applies for a supersession, the DWP should first consider whether it can be revised instead. The DWP should only supersede the decision if it cannot be revised.

There will be some cases where the original decision needs to be corrected, but it also needs to be changed from a later date. In these cases the DWP can carry out a revision and a supersession as part of the same process.¹²

Grounds for supersession — change of circumstances

The most common ground for a supersession is a change of circumstances. This is done under regulation 23 of the DA Regs. Often, a change of circumstances occurs after a client is awarded UC, changing the amount of UC that they’re entitled to. This means that the original decision is now incorrect, even though it was correct at the time, and needs to be replaced by a new decision. For example, a client in receipt of UC may move into rented accommodation, so become eligible for the housing costs element of UC.

A change of opinion is not a change of circumstances. For example, a report containing medical opinion is not a change of circumstances in itself, but may contain evidence that there has been a change of circumstance.¹³

Effective dates

The effective dates of supersessions on the grounds of a change of circumstance are set out in the DA Regs in regulations 35 and 36 and Schedule 1, from paragraph 20 onwards.The effective date will depend on when the client notifies the DWP of the change, and whether the change is advantageous to the client or not.

If a client notifies the DWP about the change of circumstances within the assessment period in which the change occurs, the supersession will take effect from the first day of that assessment period.

If the client tells the DWP after the end of the assessment period in which the change happened, the supersession can’t be backdated without an extension to the time limit. The DWP must agree that it is reasonable to extend the time limit, and that the client couldn’t tell them on time due to special circumstances. See ADM Chapter A4, paragraph A4211 for more on special circumstances. There is an absolute time limit of 13 months from the date of the change.

If the time limit is extended, the supersession will take effect from the first day of the assessment period in which the change occurred. This will allow the client to backdate any additional benefit they’re entitled to.

If the time limit is not extended, or if the change is notified outside the absolute time limit of 13 months, and the superseding decision is advantageous to the client, the supersession will take effect at the start of the assessment period in which the client notifies the DWP of the change. In this situation the client won’t be able to get an additional amount of benefit backdated.

However, if the superseding decision is disadvantageous to the client, the supersession will always take effect from the start of the assessment period in which the change occurred, regardless of when the client notifies the DWP. This means that an overpayment will be caused as a result of the client not informing the DWP promptly.

The effect of always backdating a change to the start of an assessment period may mean that a client appears to get too much, or too little, benefit. For example, a client may move into a new home in the middle of an assessment period, but the supersession adjusting the amount of housing costs element will take effect from the beginning of that assessment period. They will get paid the new amount of the housing costs element (HCE) for the whole of that assessment period. Note, however, that if the HCE is reduced due to a new determination of the Local Housing Allowance rates, the UC is superseded on different grounds and only takes effect from the start of the next assessment period instead.¹⁴

Example — Patricia

Patricia gets UC and is responsible for one child. Patricia’s assessment periods run from the 20th of each month to the 19th of the following month. On 15 March, Patricia has a second child so becomes entitled to a second child element. Patricia tells the DWP about the change of circumstance late, on 22 July, due to complications with her health after the birth.

If the late application is accepted, the supersession will take effect from 20 February, the first day of the assessment period during which the child was born. If the late application is not accepted, the supersession will take effect from 20 July, the first day of the assessment period in which Patricia informs the DWP. Patricia would need the late application to be accepted in order to get the additional amount of UC from the element backdated to March.

Example — Rakesh

Rakesh gets UC, with assessment periods running from the 20th of each month to the 19th of the following month. Rakesh was responsible for two children, but stops being entitled to a child element for their oldest child when they leave education on 30 June. Rakesh doesn’t tell the DWP about the change until 22 September. As the change is disadvantageous to Rakesh — they stop being entitled to the second child element — the supersession takes effect from 20 June, the first day of the assessment period in which the change occurred. The child element paid for the second child from then onwards will be overpaid and the overpayment will be recoverable from Rakesh.

There are some limited situations in which an advantageous supersession takes effect from the start of the assessment period in which the change occurred, even if the client tells the DWP about the change later. This includes where the client declares that they have a terminal illness, and where there’s a drop in earnings in cases where the employed earnings are reported through RTI but further information is required about the client’s earnings.¹⁵

If the supersession is advantageous to the client and is made on the DWP’s own initiative rather than the client’s request, then it will take effect at the start of the assessment period in which the DWP first took action in relation to the supersession.¹⁶

If the change of circumstances is a change in the legislation, then the supersession takes effect on the first day of the first assessment period that begins on or after the day the legislation change comes into force unless otherwise specified in the legislation.¹⁷

If the client is entitled to less benefit after a new limited capability for work (LCW) determination, the supersession won’t be backdated all the way to when their health improved, as long as certain conditions are met. This will depend on whether the client could reasonably be expected to know that there was a change they need to notify the DWP about.

• If the client couldn’t reasonably have been expected to know the change should be notified, the supersession will take effect from the start of the assessment period in which the supersession decision is made.
• If the client could reasonably have been expected to know that the change should be notified, the supersession will take effect at the start of the assessment period in which the client ought to have notified the DWP.

This stops clients being penalised if there is a partial or gradual improvement to their health which they wouldn’t be able to know leads to being entitled to less benefit.¹⁸

Example — Gina

Gina gets UC and has limited capability for work and work-related activity (LCWRA). Gina remains unwell, but there have been some continuous, modest and gradual improvements in her health since her last assessment. The DWP carries out a new assessment and determines that she now only has LCW. This means she stops qualifying for a LCWRA element. Although the improvements in Gina’s health mean that she stopped meeting the descriptors for LCWRA a few months ago, the DWP decides that Gina could not reasonably have been expected to know that. As a result, the supersession resulting from the new assessment only takes effect in the assessment period in which the new decision is made, and there is no overpayment.

Qualifying benefits

If the change of circumstances is that a qualifying benefit has been awarded, ended, or changed, the supersession can take effect at an earlier date. This applies where another relevant benefit is awarded to the claimant, or a member of their family, since the date of the original decision. The supersession takes effect on the first day of the assessment period in which the entitlement to the other benefit started, ended or changed.¹⁹ There is no time limit for requesting a supersession where the change of circumstances relates to a qualifying benefit.²⁰

The award of the other benefit must be made to the claimant themselves or a member of their family. For this purpose, “family” includes their partner, and any child or qualifying young person they are responsible for.

A relevant benefit is one which changes the amount of UC that someone is entitled to. Often this is a disability benefit, which will add a disabled child addition or a carer element. Other ways a UC award can be affected by a qualifying benefit include

• the number of bedrooms allowed in calculating the Local Housing Allowance rate,
• whether there is an under-occupancy charge
• whether there’s a housing costs contribution deducted,
• when and whether a limited capability for work and work-related activity (LCWRA) element can be included
• whether they get a work allowance
• whether they are subject to the benefit cap.

If a client is awarded Carer’s Allowance (CA), this would be a relevant benefit for the purposes of the carer element. However, the disability benefit awarded to the person the client is looking after can also be considered a relevant benefit in this situation if it leads to entitlement to the carer element.²¹ This is because there is no requirement to claim CA in order to be entitled to the carer element. The ADM at para A4361 in the example of Connor suggests that it will be a relevant benefit in cases where there is a “a clear and direct link” between the award of the disability benefit and entitlement to the carer element.²² Note that the person being awarded the relevant benefit must be a family member (partner, child or qualifying young person) for this to apply.

What’s the difference between a supersession and a revision on grounds of qualifying benefits?

Whether the decision should be revised or superseded depends on the start date of the relevant benefit award.

• If the other benefit is awarded from a date before the UC award started, the initial UC decision needs to be revised.
• If the other benefit is awarded from a later date, after the beginning of the UC award, then the initial decision should be superseded.

In both situations, the client should receive arrears of any additional UC going back to the start of the assessment period in which the entitlement to the qualifying benefit arose.

It is important to check that the effective date is correct. Often, the DWP will initially just supersede with effect from the start of the assessment period in which the qualifying benefit decision is made or the client notifies the DWP. This will need to be challenged so that the client gets the additional element backdated correctly.

Example — Adrian

Adrian gets UC and is a carer for their mother. Adrian’s assessment periods run from the 20th of each month to the 19th of the next month. On 15 July 2022, a decision is made to award Adrian’s mother AA, from 10 February 2022. Adrian earns too much to qualify for CA but meets the other qualifying conditions for CA. As a result he has become entitled to the carer element of UC. However, there is no relevant benefit award to allow the supersession to take effect at the start of the assessment period the AA has been awarded from (20 January 2022).

• The AA would count as a relevant benefit, but Adrian’s mother does not count as a family member
• There is no award of CA made to Adrian.

Adrian can argue that a late application for a supersession should be allowed, as they were not able to apply for the supersession before the AA decision was made. If the time limit is extended, the supersession could still take effect from the assessment period in which the AA was awarded from, with arrears going back to 20 January 2022. If the time limit is not extended, as the change is advantageous, the supersession will only take effect from the assessment period in which Adrian informs UC of the AA award.

Closed period supersession

A benefit award can be superseded just for a fixed period of time if there is a disadvantageous change of circumstances that has already come to an end by the time a decision is made by the DWP. This can allow the benefit to be disallowed for the fixed period only, without the client needing to make a new claim in order to re-establish entitlement afterwards. It is not clear that the DWP accepts that a closed period supersession is possible in relation to UC awards. The ADM guidance gives examples of a closed period supersession of awards of new style JSA and new style ESA, but not UC.²³ However, closed period supersessions are mentioned elsewhere in DWP guidance in relation to UC.²⁴

Example — Sara

Sara comes to see an adviser as they have just returned after being abroad for 5 weeks. Sara initially intended to return within a month, but ended up staying longer. As a result Sara was not entitled to UC during the period of time they were away, but is now entitled again after returning.

Sara can argue that a closed period supersession should be carried out for the period they weren’t entitled to UC. This would prevent Sara needing to make a new claim to re-establish entitlement to UC after returning to Great Britain. Sara would have an overpayment of UC from the time that she was away, but wouldn’t need to make a new claim if a closed period supersession was carried out.

Other grounds for a supersession

Although the most common grounds for a supersession is a change of circumstances, there are other grounds, which have their own effective dates. This includes sanction cases, contributions cases relating to late or unpaid contributions, and decisions relating to rent officers determinations.²⁵ The DWP can supersede a decision made by a First-tier Tribunal or Upper Tribunal that was made in ignorance of, or based upon a mistake as to, a material fact, or where a test case has been decided after the Tribunal’s original decision.²⁶

Supersession where the original decision was incorrect

A decision can be superseded if the original decision was wrong in law, or was made in ignorance of, or based on a mistake as to, some material fact, and it is outside the time limit for the decision to be revised, including any extension to the time limit. This is under regulation 24 of the DA Regs. The effective date of the supersession will be the first day of the assessment period in which the decision to supersede is made, or, if appropriate, in which the application for a supersession is made by the client.²⁷

This provision can be useful where it would be possible to revise a decision but for the fact that it is outside the time limit for a revision. If the DWP had made a negative inference based on an absence of evidence, and evidence is subsequently provided that shows the initial assumption was not correct, the decision can be superseded on this ground.²⁸

Note that an application for a revision can be taken as an application for a supersession and vice versa, and the DWP should consider whether to revise a decision before superseding it.²⁹ If the DWP uses this provision to supersede, it may be worth checking whether the original decision can be revised instead, which could be more beneficial to the client. The ADM states that in a case where a decision can’t be revised on any grounds, because it’s outside the absolute time limit or because the late application can’t be admitted, the DWP should first consider whether there’s a way to revise the decision on specific grounds instead. Only if there’s no specific grounds to allow a revision, the DWP should supersede using regulation 24 of the DA Regs.³⁰ Please refer to our article on revisions for more on the grounds for revision.

The ADM notes that an error of law would often be an official error. Therefore, the provision to supersede on this ground on the basis of an error of law won’t have much use, as it will often be able to revise on the ground of official error instead.³¹ A mistake in relation to a material fact could also be an official error in some cases, if it was wholly the mistake of a DWP officer.³²

A mistake as to a fact doesn’t include inferences that could be reached by applying reasoning to a fact. A supersession on this ground cannot be carried out just because a different decision maker would have reached a different decision on the same evidence.³³

Example — Meena

Meena claimed UC in April 2020. Meena didn’t inform the DWP about their housing costs, so the housing costs element wasn’t included in the award. In November 2021 Meena tells the DWP that she has had housing costs the whole time, and asks for the award to be looked at again. The application is outside the absolute time limit for the original decision to be revised on any grounds, and there are no specific grounds. The DWP therefore cannot revise the original decision, but instead supersedes using regulation 24. This takes effect from the beginning of the assessment period in which Meena reported the housing costs in November 2021.

Example — Siobhan

Siobhan claimed UC in April 2020. Siobhan didn’t inform the DWP about their housing costs, so the housing costs element wasn’t included in their award. In March 2021 Siobhan tells the DWP that they have had housing costs the whole time, and asks for the award to be looked at again. The DWP decides not to extend the time limit to request a revision, and that there are no specific grounds on which the decision can be revised. Therefore, the DWP decides to supersede the decision, using regulation 24, with effect from the beginning of the assessment period in which Siobhan reported the housing costs.

However, Siobhan can request an MR and appeal the supersession decision, arguing that the DWP should consider extending the time limit for a revision on any grounds. If the decision was revised on any grounds, Siobhan could get arrears going back to April 2020.

Supersession where there has been new medical evidence

A UC decision can be superseded where the DWP has received new medical evidence from a healthcare professional or another person approved by the DWP, or made a determination that the client is to be treated as having LCW or LCWRA.³⁴ As this is a separate ground, there doesn’t need to be a change of circumstances for a supersession to be carried out on this ground. Note that a report containing a new medical opinion is not a change of circumstances in itself, but it may contain evidence that there has been a change.³⁵

The effective date of the supersession depends on whether the client is subject to the ‘relevant period’ of 3 months in which they can’t get the LCWRA element at the start of the UC award.

• If the relevant period applies, the supersession takes effect at the end of that relevant period. For example, if a client claims UC and is then assessed as having LCWRA, their award will be superseded to include the LCWRA element from the first day of the first assessment period after the relevant period ends.³⁶
• If the relevant period does not apply, the supersession takes effect from the beginning of the assessment period in which the decision is made, if done on the DWP’s own initiative, or in which the application for a supersession was made by the client. The relevant period wouldn’t apply in a case where the client has previously had LCW or LCWRA in their award, or arguably in a case where they are found to have LCW but not LCWRA.

Example — Mari

Mari gets UC and has LCW. In July, Mari reports that their health has deteriorated, and a new WCA is carried out. In December the DWP determines that Mari has LCWRA. The supersession should take effect on the first day of the assessment period in which Mari reported the change, back in July — reporting a change can be considered an application for a supersession under regulation 33 of the DA Regs.

Example — Blake

Blake gets UC and has LCW. In July, the DWP starts a new WCA to review Blake’s capability for work. In August, Blake fills in a UC50 form and explains that their condition has deteriorated. The DWP determines that Blake has LCWRA in December.

The supersession takes effect on the first day of the assessment period in which the DWP makes the decision to supersede, in December, as it was done on the DWP’s own initiative.

However, it may be possible to argue that the supersession should instead take effect at the start of the assessment period in which Blake completed the UC50. Blake could argue that declaring the deterioration on the UC50 constituted reporting a change, and therefore was a request for a supersession under regulation 33 of the DA Regs.

Superseding a Tribunal’s decision

A First-tier Tribunal decision cannot be revised by the DWP — only decisions by the DWP can be revised.³⁷ A Tribunal decision can be superseded if there has been a change of circumstance, if there’s new medical evidence, or if the decision was made in ignorance of, or based upon a mistake as to, a material fact.³⁸

There is also a provision allowing a Tribunal to make an unfavourable decision where the outcome of an appeal could be affected by a pending appeal in a separate case. Where this provision is followed, then the DWP should supersede the Tribunal’s decision if appropriate once the outcome of the other case has been received.³⁹

Appeal rights where a supersession has been requested

A supersession decision can be revised if there are grounds to do so. The client can request a Mandatory Reconsideration (MR) and appeal. If the DWP refuses the application for a supersession, this will be a decision not to supersede. This is also a decision that a client can request an MR and appeal against.⁴⁰ If the decision not to supersede is then revised or overturned at appeal, it becomes a decision to supersede instead. The effective date is then worked out in the usual way.⁴¹

Two problematic scenarios

The finality of decisions causes some problems where entitlement to benefit arises due to a later change. There are some situations in which it may not be possible to change a decision, and a new claim may be required. This could be more problematic with regards to UC than it was in relation to some legacy benefits, because of the very limited provisions for backdating a new UC claim.⁴²

1. Test cases

If there’s a change to how the law should be interpreted in a test case at the Upper Tribunal or court, the new interpretation can’t be taken into account by the DWP when deciding on other benefit claims for any period before the effective date of the test case.⁴³ This is referred to as the “anti-test case rule.”

If an original decision to award UC has become incorrect as the result of a test case, the decision can be superseded. The effective date of the supersession will be the date of the test case decision.⁴⁴ It will not be possible to revise the original decision, because of the anti-test case rule and the effect of section 8 of the 1998 Act.

This means that if the client was refused benefit altogether in the original decision, there won’t be a way to establish benefit entitlement following the resolution of the test case without making a new claim.

2. Entitlement only arises due to qualifying benefits

We’ve discussed above how benefit awards can be revised or superseded following the award of a relevant benefit to the client or a member of their family. Depending on the start date of the qualifying benefit, the award can be revised on grounds of a relevant benefit award or superseded on grounds of a change of circumstances. However, this is not possible where the original decision was to refuse benefit. Only a decision to award benefit can be revised on the grounds of a relevant benefit award,⁴⁵ and if UC is refused and the qualifying benefit is awarded later, there’s no UC award to supersede. In UC, there’s no equivalent to the legacy benefit provision allowing the client to make an initial claim that’s refused followed by a later claim that can be fully backdated once the qualifying benefit is awarded.⁴⁶

If the claim for UC was made after the claim for qualifying benefit, there may be a possibility of arguing that the refusal decision can be revised on any grounds instead, as long as it is within the time limit. It has been established in MW v SSWP (IS) [2022] UKUT 59 (AAC) that a later retrospective award of a qualifying benefit is not a change of circumstances that has occurred since the decision being challenged. Therefore, a revision on any grounds is not prohibited in this situation by regulation 5(2)(a) of the DA Regs, which prevents a revision on any grounds “in respect of a relevant change of circumstances which occurred since the decision had effect.” See also our Adviser Online article UC or not UC? That is the question, which covers this issue in relation to Income Support.

Example — Yasmin and James

Yasmin works full time, and James cares full-time for their daughter. Their UC claim is refused due to the level of household income. James then claims DLA for their daughter, which is awarded a few months later. The inclusion of a carer element and child disability addition means they now qualify for some UC.

In this situation, it is not possible to revise the UC refusal, which was correct at the time, as DLA hasn’t been backdated to the date of the UC claim. It is not possible to supersede the UC decision as there was no award of UC. James and Yasmin need to make a new UC claim.

If Yasmin and James had made a new claim for UC after the date that the DLA claim was made, they could try to argue that the original UC refusal can be revised on any grounds. They would need to argue that the DLA award isn’t a change occurring at a later date, so that the revision isn’t prevented by regulation 5(2)(a) of the DA Regs. They can reference MW v SSWP (IS) [2022] UKUT 59 (AAC) to help with this argument. They would also need to argue that there are special circumstances for the late revision request, as they had to wait for the DLA decision.

If 13 months has passed since the date of the original UC decision, a revision on any grounds is no longer possible. This might make it worthwhile to make repeated claims to UC, in case the DLA decision takes longer than 13 months from the date of the first UC claim.

Summary

Decisions can be superseded in situations where they can’t be revised. For example

• If circumstances have changed since the date of a decision to award benefit, that decision can be superseded on the grounds of a change of circumstance.
• If a decision to award benefit could otherwise be revised but it is outside the time limit, the decision can be superseded instead.

Because supersessions involve replacing the original decision with a new decision, it is important to know the date that it takes effect. In the case of a supersession on the grounds of a change of circumstance, the effective date will depend on a number of factors including

• When the client tells the DWP about the change, and if late, whether the time limit can be extended,
• Whether the new decision is advantageous or disadvantageous to the client,
• Whether the change of circumstances relates to a qualifying benefit award.

A decision to refuse benefit can’t be superseded, so if a client only becomes entitled to benefit due to a later change of circumstances, they may need to make a new claim.

It is important to understand the rules around revisions and supersessions to make sure that clients’ decisions are changed correctly and they get as much arrears of UC as they are able to.

Josh Gilbert works as a Welfare Benefit expert in the Expert Advice team at Citizens Advice.

The information in this article is correct as of the date of publication.

Unfortunately, we are unable to respond to comments left on the medium site — please contact expertadvicesupport@citizensadvice.org.uk if you wish to give feedback on an article.

References

[1] Section 9(3), Social security Act 1998; regulation 21, The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[2] Section 17, Social Security Act 1998

[3] Regulation 26, The Universal Credit, PIP, JSA and ESA (Claims and Payments) Regulations 2013

[4] ADM Chapter A4 paragraph A4002

[5] Section 10(5), The Social Security Act 1998

[6] Section 7, Welfare Reform Act 2012

[7] Regulation 34, The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[8] Section 8, The Social security Act 1998

[9] R(I) 5/02

[10] Regulation 33(1), The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[11] Regulation 32, The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[12] Regulation 32, The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013; ADM Chapter A3 paragraph A3025; ADM Chapter A4 paragraph A4011

[13] R(DLA) 6/01; ADM Chapter A4 paragraph A4108

[14] Regulations 30(1) and 35(14), The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[15] Schedule 1 paragraphs 27 and paragraph 22, The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[16] Schedule 1 paragraph 29, The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[17] Schedule 1 paragraphs 32 and 33, The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[18] Schedule 1 paragraphs 23–25, The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[19] Schedule 1 paragraphs 31 and 32, The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[20] OL v SSWP (ESA) [2018] UKUT 135 (AAC)

[21] Regulations 29 and 30, UC Regulations 2013

[22] ADM Chapter A4 paragraph A4361

[23] ADM Chapter A4, paragraphs A4117–8

[24] ADM Memo 1/22

[25] Regulations 27, 28 and 30, The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[26] Regulation 31, The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[27] Regulation 35(4), The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[28] ADM Chapter A4, paragraph A4272

[29] Regulations 32 and 33, The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[30] ADM Chapter A3 paragraph A3027

[31] ADM Chapter A4, paragraph A4245

[32]ADM Chapter A4, paragraph A4273

[33] R(I) 3/75; ADM Chapter A4, paragraph A4269

[34] Regulation 26, The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[35] R(DLA) 6/01; ADM Chapter A4 paragraph A4108

[36] Regulation 28, UC Regulations 2013, regulation 35(9)(a) The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[37] Regulations 5 and 8, The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[38] Regulations 23, 26 and 31, The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[39] Section 26, Social Security Act 1998; Regulation 31(b), The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[40] R(DLA) 1/03

[41] ADM Chapter A4, paragraph A4022

[42] Regulation 26, The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Claims and Payments) Regulations 2013

[43] Section 27, Social Security Act 1998

[44] Regulation 35(5), The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[45] Regulation 12, The UC, PIP, JSA and ESA (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013

[46] Regulations 16–18, The Social Security (Claims and Payments) Regulations 1987