We have received the attached notification regarding an exceptional case. The LSC have always accepted proof after the date of the CW1 being signed but are now saying that the CW1 is a contract and won't pay for work if the proof is obtained later. When we know that someone is eligible we start the work and request proof from JobCentre Plus. The LSC have previously accepted this but is seems that this is yet another example of finding ways not to pay us for work we have done.
Hi Cheryl, this is something that I have been looking into recently, primarily in relation to client's who have spouses abroad, and I have been unable to obtain evidence of partners means at time of assessment and granting CLR.
I was directed to the following guidance by a very helpful member of ILPA.
CLA 55 Evidence of Means for Controlled Work cases POINT OF PRINCIPLE DATE: 6 October 2011 OFFICE REFERENCE NUMBER: CA4/KEI/133307 The effect of paragraphs 6.1 and 6.2 of Section B6 of the Funding Code, and paragraphs 2.4 and 2.5 of Section 2 of the Unified Contract Specification are as follows: 1. Where it is not practicable to obtain evidence of eligibility before commencing work, there must be an assessment of means on the basis of whatever information is available from the client, and that assessment must be recorded on the form which is signed by the client as his or her affirmation of eligibility. 2. 2.5 of the Contract also states that, in these circumstances, it is necessary for the provider to require the client to provide evidence of means as soon as practicable. This is an on-going contractual duty until it has been fulfilled and a claim for payment should not be made to the LSC without such evidence having been obtained and retained on the file. 3. In any case which on audit is found to have no such evidence on file, the preliminary decision will be to nil assess. A provider appealing or seeking review of such decision will have to provide evidence of eligibility at the time the form was signed and a satisfactory explanation as to why a claim was submitted for payment without such evidence being on file. If these two requirements are fulfilled, the reviewer/ICA will be able to exercise discretion to allow payment in appropriate circumstances.
I hope that helps. You will presumably have 28 days from the date that your ECClaim1 is refused, and I find that very detailed responses referring to the necessary authority is usually successful.
Post by Patrick Torsney on Apr 2, 2012 21:10:16 GMT
Providing the evidence was on file prior to the case being submitted for assessment, and related to the computation period etc, CLA55 should not be relevant. I'd be interested to see the actual decision on this EC. I suspect it's someone who has their wires crossed in respect of the relevant Funding Code provisions or, the LSC is up to no good and trying to bend CLA55 to its will
There is of course the issue of the LSC refusing to pay for work prior to proof of income being obtained on assessment, which has come up before; however, I'd rather hear the full story before blathering on further....
