Guidance

LA Welfare Direct 10/20

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 [email protected]

Who should read

All Housing Benefit staff.

Action

For information.

Appendices

DHP mid-year monitoring return template 2020-21 is published as a separate
Appendix A

CIS500 template is published as a separate Appendix B

CIS500 user instructions is published as a separate Appendix C

Examples of completed HBMS MI spreadsheets is published as a separate Appendix D

Editorial

I last wrote this editorial for the May 2020 issue and, five months on, it seems like much longer ago. So much has changed and continues to change on a daily and weekly basis. We are, of course, all continuing to adapt to this change in various ways, both within the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) and local authorities (LAs). With a Spending Review announcement less than two months away, you don’t need to be Mystic Meg to know that more changes are likely.

As I write this, and all being well, we are now just a month away from the national rollout of our data sharing solution for Blue Badge disabled parking permit applications. Those LAs that have been working with us over the summer, providing feedback on the mock-up of the solution, have fed back genuine delight. Some have suggested that it will reduce a 45-minute process to just 1 minute, and this sort of feedback suggests our estimate of the administrative cost savings of £43 million, across all Blue Badge issuing LAs, is pretty close.

For longstanding LA colleagues, they will know that a Blue Badge data sharing solution between DWP and LAs has been an ambition for six years or more. I think we’d all agree that six years is a long time, and ideally it would have been delivered sooner. However, the important thing to me is to recognise that good things aren’t always achieved easily and that persistence is vital in overcoming the many obstacles that inevitably occur when attempting transformative change.

As ever, I welcome feedback about all our data sharing, both projects and our business as usual services. We recognise we are not perfect but we are constantly striving to get better. Some of the personal feedback I’ve received over the last two years, often unprompted, is that many LAs have recognised these gradual improvements over time.

But we are not resting on our laurels. So many of you will be well aware of the quarterly all-LA telephone conferences my team has held beginning in February this year. We’ve had three so far, with around half of LAs dialling in. The calls start with a 15 minute update from me on all our current and upcoming projects. The remaining 45 minutes are focused on LA questions, either about what I’ve already said or about other data sharing or IT issues they are facing.

From the feedback received so far, those dialling in seem to have really benefited from the calls. For those LA readers who haven’t dialled in so far, I strongly encourage you to do so as you are potentially missing out on information about resolutions to longstanding IT and data sharing problems. The next call is likely to be in late November, so look out for details in upcoming issues of LA Welfare Direct.

And that’s all from me this month. You’ll see we have another bumper set of articles in this month’s issue, which we hope you find informative and useful.

Best wishes

Paul Selby
Deputy Divisional Manager

Local Authority Partnership
Engagement and Delivery (LA-PED) division

Discretionary Housing Payments mid-year monitoring return 2020 to 2021 by Thursday 8 October 2020

1. Thank you for providing your end-of-year 2019-20 Discretionary Housing Payment (DHP) monitoring returns. The resulting information Use of Discretionary Housing Payments – Analysis for April 2019 to March 2020 has been published.

2. You are now asked to provide the mid-year returns in relation to the period 1 April 2020 to 30 September 2020. The monitoring returns are important in helping the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) understand how DHPs are being used to support people affected by Welfare Reforms. Additionally, the returns will help us better understand the ongoing impacts of the pandemic on LAs and, therefore, we are asking for the forms to be returned by a shorter deadline than normal.

3. We are, again, only seeking details of DHPs paid during this period. LAs should not include any DHP spend, which is committed, but is due to be paid after 30 September 2020. Further details can be found in Appendix B of the Discretionary Housing Payment Guidance Manual and the ‘Guide to completion’ tab of the DHP monitoring form which is attached as separate Appendix A.

4. In line with the approach taken on previous occasions, the monitoring form asks for the value of DHPs paid, broken down into Welfare Reform impacts and the purpose of the award, for example, an award made as a result of the implementation of the lower benefit cap with the intention of helping the claimant secure and move into alternative accommodation. If information relating to the purpose of the award is not available, LAs are asked just to record the total DHP paid in respect of the Welfare Reform listed.

5. We are also asking for information on the total number of applications received and awards made, including the number specific to Universal Credit claimants.

6. We would greatly appreciate your completed monitoring form by Thursday 8 October 2020 but no later than 15 October to [email protected]

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

7. Circular HB A9/2016 detailed the process to use when completing the Personal Details Verification Report (PDVR) and the associated CIS500 template.

8. Changes have now been made to the appearance of the CIS500 template and the latest version (23.1) is attached alongside this bulletin as Appendix B along with updated user instructions at Appendix C. The template and instructions are also available on Glasscubes.

9. Also, due to inconsistencies in the way LAs submit CIS500 templates to DWP, we now ask that LAs provide standard information within the email subject field as follows:

LA Name – CIS500

10. This will allow DWP’s Data Guardian Team to easily recognise that an LA has submitted a CIS500 and take appropriate action.

11. If you have any questions about this article you can contact [email protected]

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

12. The Housing Benefit (HB) Award Accuracy Initiative is due to be re-launched from 5 October 2020 for those local authorities (LAs) that have ‘opted in’.

13. The correct recording of cases including the return of clerical MI to DWP for HBMS case outcomes is a key mandatory activity within the HB Award Accuracy Initiative once an LA has opted in.

14. Therefore, we thought it would be helpful to remind LAs how to do this.

HBMS guidance

15. LAs are sent a HBMS file each month through Transfer your Files that contains several documents to support them with processing their HBMS referrals:

• LA ID .001 – this file contains all the HBMS referrals to LAs – depending on their IT system some LAs use this file to load into their system – DWP use this to populate the results spreadsheets
• LA ID_DATE_AI – this file contains additional information
• LA ID_DATE_CORE – this file contains the core information of the referral
• LA ID_hbms_DATE.rtf – this file contains all the HBMS referrals. Depending on their IT system some LAs use this to load into their system
• AOBWR627_LAID_RISK – this file contains the risk data
• HBC.LAID. DATE - this file contains the Personal Details Verification Report (PDVR) Customer
• HBNC.LAID. DATE – this file contains the PDVR Non Customer
• Result spreadsheet.mem excel – this spreadsheet contains blank columns that requires the LA to input their results and email a return each month back to [email protected]

Additional result spreadsheet information

16. Previous guidance may have referred to the Result spreadsheet.mem excel spreadsheet as a ‘clerical return spreadsheet’. Note: All previous guidance should now be destroyed and the spreadsheet will now be known as the HBMS MI spreadsheet.

17. We recognise the HBMS MI spreadsheet requires upgrading and are looking at the possibility of automating this MI collection via SHBE (Single Housing Benefit Extract) during 2021.

Change to the HBMS MI spreadsheet return process

18. Previous guidance instructed LAs to return the HBMS MI spreadsheet(s) once a final result had been decided on every referral within the spreadsheet.

19. This is no longer the case and the spreadsheet should be returned every month in line with your HBMS MI timetable at Appendix A of circular HB A9/2020 which, for consistency, has been aligned with the same dates LAs currently submit their SHBE returns.

The HBMS MI spreadsheet return process in full

20. Each referral detailed on the HBMS MI spreadsheet(s) should be continually updated until the LA is due to send their return(s) back to DWP, in line with their HBMS MI timetable.

21. Therefore, it is likely that LAs will be updating several HBMS MI spreadsheets at any one time and continually submitting the HBMS MI spreadsheets to DWP, each month, until such time that all referrals on a HBMS MI spreadsheet have reached an ‘outcome’ position and been notified.

22. DWP’s IT system is designed, on upload, to ignore previously submitted results. This means that an LA can keep updating and re-submitting the same HBMS MI spreadsheet to DWP, without deleting any previously submitted results. This can happen until all action on every referral is completed.

23. The most recent HBMS MI spreadsheet sent to an LA must form part of the subsequent monthly return, along with any other updated HBMS MI spreadsheets. They do not need to be amalgamated and can be sent individually.

24. It is imperative that HBMS MI spreadsheets are not stockpiled until all referrals have reached an outcome position. Any such delays will provide an inaccurate picture of the LAs current activity and may affect their HB Award Accuracy funding.

25. Any HBMS MI spreadsheets incorrectly completed will result in DWP not being able to upload the results into the DWP IT system and may result in the HBMS MI spreadsheet being returned to the LA for corrective action.

26. If LAs currently automate the HBMS MI spreadsheet into their own internal IT systems, they can continue to do so.

27. Further guidance on ‘How to complete the HBMS MI spreadsheet’ and the ‘Results codes’ can be found within Annex A and B respectively and examples of completed HBMS MI spreadsheets can be found attached as Appendix D.

Retention of HBMS referrals

28. On completion of the HBMS referrals The Data Protection Act and General Data Protection Regulation requires that personal data is not kept longer than is necessary in accordance with the LA’s retention policy.

29. DWP policy is that data is retained only if a business need exists and should be no longer than 14 months.

Further support

30. If you require any further guidance you can contact [email protected]

31. Further information on the HB Award Accuracy Initiative, including the HBMS MI timetable 2020-21 can be found in circular HB A9/2020

32. If you have any questions regarding the content of this article, you can email [email protected]

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

33. As communicated in a letter to local authority (LA) Revenues and Benefits managers and Chief Finance Officers and circular HB A9/2020, the HB Award Accuracy Initiative was re-launched on Tuesday 4 August 2020.

34. As we reach the first possible start date of Monday 5 October 2020, we are keen to ensure LAs remain supported through the launch process. To that end we have arranged a further all-LA telephone conference, which will be held on Monday 26 October from 11am to 12noon. The dial in details are as follows:

Dial in number: 020 3481 3256
Conference PIN: 3949634#

35. The purpose of this telephone conference is to ensure all LAs that started activities on 5 October are able to ask questions should they need to and allow LAs that are starting on the later dates of either 2 November and 30 November to hear how the initiative is going so far.

36. A replay facility will be available for 31 days following the call. The dial-in-details and conference PIN for the replay are as follows:

Replay dial in number: 020 8196 1998
Conference PIN: 3949634#

Frequently asked questions

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

38\, If you have any further questions about the HB Award Accuracy Initiative, you can contact [email protected]

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

39. As notified in LAWD5/2020, from 1 April 2020, the Local Authority Partnership, Engagement and Delivery (LA-PED) division changed our name from Housing Delivery Division (HDD). We made this change to better reflect what we do currently and what we plan to do more of in the future.

40. In line with this change of name, we have updated our previous generic inbox email addresses to those prefixed with LAWELFARE as listed in Annex D.

41. As from now, if you use an old email address you will receive an automated response informing you of the new email address and your email will be re-directed. However, this re-direction will stop in early January 2021 when the old inboxes will be closed.

42. If you have any questions you can email [email protected]

HB decisions by the Upper Tribunal

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

• CH/2736/2019: Tribunal concluded a period of 50 days following termination of employment was not an undue delay on the part of the claimant in recording her unemployment and registering as a jobseeker in order to retain her worker status, in accordance with Regulation 6(2)(b) of the Immigration (EEA) regulations 2016. The tribunal was satisfied the claimant’s attempts to obtain a new job and save her previous one can be treated as compelling reasons

• CSH/744/14 CSH753/14 CSH/767/14 CSH/771/14 CSH41/15 CSH/124/15 CSH/216/16 CSH/217/16 CSH635/14 CSH/654/14 CSH/685/14 CSH/712/14 CSH/728/14: Removal of the Spare Room Subsidy. Supreme Court decision in Carmichael applied to outstanding appeals

44. 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.

45. If you have any queries about cases before the UT Judges or courts, please contact us by email at [email protected]

New Legislation

46. We have not been made aware of any Statutory Instruments (SIs) since the last edition of this bulletin.

47. Copies of SIs can be downloaded from legislation.gov.uk

What’s new on our HB pages on GOV.UK

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

LAWD9/2020

Link: LAWD9/2020

• Editorial
• NHS Test and Trace self-isolation payment
• Additional earnings disregard payment for HB claimants
• HB Award Accuracy relaunch: Update and further all-LA telephone conferences
• Expressions of interest: LA subsidy workshops in 2021
• Invite to LAs: Data sharing and IT issues consultation and engagement forum
• Student uprating 2020-21
• Publication of debt management statistics
• DWP secondment opportunities
• Decisions with the Upper Tribunal
• New Legislation
• What’s new on our HB pages on www.gov.uk
• Further HB Award Accuracy Initiative frequently asked questions

LAWDlite9/2020

Link: LAWDlite9/2020

• Discretionary Housing Payments: Support for claimants living in a sanctuary scheme property
• Advance notice: Mid-year Discretionary Housing Payments monitoring return
• Housing Benefit flows data moving to Stat-Xplore only

Annex A: How to complete the MI spreadsheet

Column A: Referral Number

This contains the referral number. It is for DWP use allows the results contained with HBMS MI spreadsheet to be uploaded into DWP systems, once returned by the LA.

This column should not be altered.

Column B: Rule Number

This number is to identify which rule the data has been matched against. The rule number supports DWP to correctly match the results to the correct rule.

This column should not be altered.

Column C: Match Date

This date supports the LA to understand when the internal matching of data took place to identify the referral. It also ensures DWP correctly matches the date to the results.

This column should not be altered.

Column D: LA reference Number

This is the unique reference number which allows DWP to recognise which LA has provided the results when they are uploaded into DWP systems.

This column should not be altered.

Column E: Housing Benefit Discrepancy

This column must be completed by the LA when there is an overpayment only and should contain the difference between what was paid and what should have been paid as a weekly amount (not the full total).

Do not enter a £ sign.

If there is no overpayment this field must be left blank.

Column F: Housing Benefit Overpayment

This column must be completed by the LA and should contain the total amount of any Housing Benefit overpayment if there has been one.

Do not enter a £ sign.

If there is no overpayment this field must be left blank

Column G: Housing Benefit Underpayment weekly

This column must be completed by the LA when there is an underpayment only It should contain the weekly amount (not the full total) and it should be calculated by the difference between what was paid and what should have been paid.

Do not enter a £ sign.

If there is no underpayment this field must be left blank.

Column H: Housing Benefit Underpayment Total

This column must be completed by the LA and should contain the total amount of any Housing Benefit underpayment if there has been one.

Do not enter a £ sign.

If there is no underpayment this field must be left blank.

Columns I, J, K and L: Council Tax, Discrepancy, Overpayment, Underpayment Weekly, Underpayment Total

LAs are not required to complete these fields as Council Tax is no longer a DWP benefit and this information is not required for HBMS.

Column M: Error Type

If an LA has recorded an underpayment or an over-payment in columns E, F, G and H then an ‘Error Type’ must be selected from the drop down box to identify how the payment error occurred.

These error types include:

• fraud
• claimant error
• government departments
• local authority error
• other

Column N: Result Codes

If an investigation has already commenced and/or there is no under payment or over payment identified LAs must select one of the negative codes from the drop-down box and no other columns should be completed.

Further guidance that provides explanations for each of the codes can be found in Appendix C.

Column O: Date

Should an LA select Code 4z in Column N then the date the investigation commenced should be input into this column.

This date must be prior to the HBMS match date that is populated in Column C.

If code 4z has not been selected this column must be left blank.

Column P: Sanction

As LAs no longer undertake fraud activity this column must now be left blank.

Annex B: Result codes

This list has been compiled to support LAs to understand which result code should be selected in Column N when an LA has identified there is an underpayment or overpayment on a HB claim.

Please select one code only

Code 3: Retrospective Change

In between the date of the DWP HBMS data match and the DWP issuing the referral, a change of circumstances has been reported by the claimant and has been actioned by the LA.

Code 4: Backlog of Work

Although a change in circumstances had been reported before the date of the DWP HBMS data match, the LA has not had time to complete their action to avoid a HBMS referral being issued.

Code 4D: Second Adult Rebate

A second adult in the household qualifies for a CT rebate.

Do not use

Code 4E: IS/JSA Clerical Case

IS or JSA has been paid, or is currently being paid clerically.

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, please enter the date you commenced your investigation in Column O- this should be prior to the HBMS “Date of Match”.

Code 6: Unable to trace Occupational Pension

No Occupational Pension payments could be traced for the claimant.

To be used on the Occupational Pension HBMS rules only.

Code 6F: Lump Sum Payment

The claimant received a lump sum payment.

To be used on the Occupational Pension HBMS rules only.

Code 6G: Claimant Deceased

The claimant has died and no overpayment has been created.

Not to be used on rules which identify deceased claimants for example HBMS rule HBIN004.

Code 6Z: LA Input Error

Information had been incorrectly entered by an LA processor on their own LA HB system that resulted in an incorrect HBMS referral being issued.

LAs must correct the error to prevent further matches being generated.

Code 11: Still below applicable amount / No affect to benefit

The discrepancy was highlighted by the HBMS referral but once corrected had no effect on the amount of HB in payment.

Code 12: LA Data Error

The DWP HBMS data match has occurred to an input user error on from the LA IT system.

Code 13: HBMS User Error

This code is no longer required

Do not use

Code 14: DWP / External Data Source Error

The HBMS referral has matched as a result of incorrect data outside of DWP or an LA.

This could include: (Her Majesties Revenue and Customs (HMRC) or Prison Service.

Code 15: Temporary Absence

The claimant previously was or is currently temporarily absent from the HB address and does intend to return.

Code 16: Claimant Vacated

The claimant has vacated the property and cannot be traced therefore the LAS has closed the HB claim.

Code 17: HB address correct

The LA is satisfied that the address they hold for the claimant is current and correct.

Annex C: Further HB Award Accuracy Initiative frequently asked questions

Question 1

Q1: What happens if a Housing Benefit (HB) claim migrates to Universal Credit (UC) in the middle of a Full Case Review (FCR)?

A1: Existing regulations make detailed provision in respect of changes in circumstance and termination of HB entitlement, including UC migration. As with any change that terminates HB entitlement (vacation, income or capital exceeds threshold) the fact it is received after the start of any fraud and error activity does not impact on existing change, suspension or termination rules. The same principle applies with a UC ‘Stop notice’.

In relation to the completion of fraud and error activity management information, any change including the UC Stop notice, received after the activity has started and before completion of the same activity should be recorded appropriately. This includes the recording of the outcome of the fraud and error detection activity.

The assumption made is the review activity is the catalyst for the change regardless of reasons. To do otherwise would add additional complexity, and the assumption is consistent in historical fraud and activity initiatives.

Question 2

Q2: When reviewing these original files, I noticed a large volume of the highest risk cases are either temporary accommodation or supported exempt accommodation on UC for single people where we have received a UC award from DWP within the last 2 months. Do you still expect us to review these cases? I was under the impression we are looking for claims which change entitlement and these cases won’t. Do we have flexibility within the data to exclude cases like this, or is the expectation to review all of the highest risk cases even if we haven’t completed a FCR in the last 12 months?

A2: We are giving LAs the flexibility and discretion to decide which cases they believe are worth doing a FCR, within certain parameters. So, for example, if you had done a FCR on any type of case 11 months ago, we’d expect LAs to consider whether it was worth doing again now. If it had only been one month since the FCR, it would almost certainly not be worth doing again. If over 12 months since the last FCR, we’d definitely expect this case to have a fresh FCR completed.

However, if the case had only been partially looked at in the last 12 months, then once again, we would expect LAs to consider whether it was worth looking at for a FCR now. An example would be if a Verify Earnings and Pensions Alert had been actioned last month, but the rest of the case details had not been reviewed for well over 12 months.

If, however, you have commenced a review on a case prior to being notified of a UC award from DWP, it will have to be completed and an outcome recorded against the fraud and error detection activity.

Question 3

Q3: Having read through circular A9/2020, I would still like clarification on how we report back on cases that have been reported as ‘high priority’ but, for whatever reason, we have chosen not to carry out a FCR on. For example, if we have reviewed the case in the past calendar month prior to receiving the risk file. Do we need to report back on these? If not, how do you know that we have considered these cases? Would it then be a case of ensuring the required number of FCRs that are required are carried out over lower level priority cases?

A3: If a case is marked as high priority on the Risk file, there isn’t an expectation that you will undertake a FCR on every case; particularly if you have undertaken a recent FCR on the case. Whether you undertake a FCR on these cases will, in part, be driven by what recent review activity has been undertaken on the case and a local assessment on the value of undertaking a further review. We will be monitoring volumes of FCRs you undertake identified via the Risk file, rather than the actual cases identified on the file. If you reach a position where you don’t have the volumes of high risk cases marked on the file to meet the volume you’re expected to undertake, you are encouraged to consider the next highest ‘risk scored’ case on the file; noting that you will have a risk score for every HB case on your caseload within the file.

Question 4

Q4: In paragraph 4 of circular HB A9/2020, it talks about the correct recording of cases and the return of management information also being mandatory, as well as the actioning of FCRs and HBMS cases. What happens if there is an issue in sending our SHBE (Single Housing Benefit Extract) return to DWP?

A4: If there is a problem returning your monthly SHBE file to DWP you should let us know straightaway. We will then work with you and your software supplier to ensure this is resolved as soon as possible.

Question 5

Q5: What should we do if we receive less or more HBMS referrals (including Self-employed Reviews (SERs)) or FCR cases than resourced to undertake?

A5: Should an LA find itself with spare resource capacity as a result of fewer than expected HBMS/SER referrals, for which it has received funding, it is expected that the LA should look to use that capacity to undertake additional FCRs.

Unlike the Risk data, where the first month’s report provides a reasonable prediction of the high risk case volumes for the year (subject to some quarterly variation linked to the seasonal factors that inform identified cases), the HBMS/SER volumes are likely to vary from month to month. The first report received in the month of September being likely to produce the highest monthly volume.

On this basis, we do not recommend that LAs plan monthly volumes of HBMS/SER referrals to be undertaken as a proportion of a single month’s referral volumes. Rather, that all HBMS/SER cases are uploaded each month and LAs aim to complete them all (not necessarily within that month). This will ensure LAs have enough referrals uploaded to undertake the minimum volumes detailed in their allocation for the 6-month period.

In the unlikely event that LAs receive more HBMS/SER referrals than resourced to undertake over the 6-month period, we would encourage LAs to undertake as many additional referrals as they can (prioritising SER cases); as long as they are not at the expense of achieving the FCR volumes LAs have been resourced to undertake.

FCRs

Should an LA find itself with fewer than expected FCRs marked as high priority cases, LAs should look at the cases with the next highest risk scores.

It is not the intention of DWP to renegotiate the FCR and HBMS/SER volumes notified to LAs and against which they are monitored, rather an expectation that the LA will achieve 100% plus in performance terms.

Annex D: New LA-PED division generic email addresses

Old email address	New email address
[email protected]	[email protected] The redirect for this address will remain in place until the end of the financial year 2020-21.
[email protected]	[email protected]
[email protected]	Maintained as [email protected]
[email protected]	[email protected]
[email protected]	[email protected]
[email protected]	[email protected]
[email protected]	[email protected]
[email protected]	[email protected]
[email protected]	[email protected]
[email protected]	[email protected]
[email protected]	[email protected]
[email protected]	[email protected]
[email protected]	lawelfare.la&[email protected]
[email protected]	[email protected]
[email protected]	[email protected]
[email protected]	[email protected]
[email protected]	[email protected]
[email protected]	[email protected]
Not applicable as new.	[email protected]