THE Social Security Department has been criticised over its handling of a vulnerable family’s benefits claim – despite a tribunal ruling that the financial support could not be backdated.
The Social Security Tribunal found that the department had relied on confusing, outdated and legally irrelevant guidance in the case of a parent seeking Child Personal Care Allowance for their child.
The child had “long-standing neurodevelopmental issues” and required “substantial ongoing support at home”.
The family had “no history of claiming income support” until the parent had to reduce their working hours in April 2025 to become a carer for their child.
Although the family was awarded both Home Carer’s Allowance and Child Personal Care Allowance, a dispute arose over how far back the Child Personal Care Allowance payments should be made.
The parent argued they should receive support from January 2025, claiming “with some justification, that none of the services that had contact with their child had signposted the family towards this benefit when it should have been clear that they qualified for it”.
The Social Security Department acknowledged that the family “would have likely been entitled to this help at an earlier date”, but determined that it was not appropriate to backdate the benefit beyond when contact was first made in April 2025.
However, the tribunal rejected both positions, ruling that payments could only legally begin from 9 June 2025 – the date the formal application was submitted.
Despite being unable to backdate the payment, as desired by the parent, the tribunal was critical of the department’s conduct.
The tribunal said: “We wish to place on record, as we did at the conclusion of the hearing, that we were not as well assisted as we should have been by the material that was placed before us by the [Social Security] Department.”
The panel described the 44-page redetermination record as “lengthy” and “not clearly expressed”.
It added that the documentation “included reference to matters which were irrelevant” and relied on out-of-date guidance that should not have been used.
The tribunal said that it could “well imagine the difficulty” that would have faced the parent in trying to understand the documentation, adding that it had been assured by Social Security that steps were being taken to improve the quality of written decisions.
The panel added that “it should be possible to explain the application of Income Support or Social Security legislation concisely and in a way that can be readily understood by claimants”.
The tribunal also noted that the family had technically been overpaid due to the earlier April start date previously applied.
However, it welcomed the Social Security Minister’s decision not to recover the money, stating it would be “entirely unfair” to do so.
