Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v T.R.

Social-security appeals are decision-based. A tribunal determining an earlier benefit decision cannot make an award for a period covered by a later decision on the same benefit, unless that later decision is itself properly before it.

The scope of a mandatory reconsideration and ensuing appeal is determined objectively by the decision-making process, not by the claimant’s understanding of the dispute. A LEAP review concerning one earlier decision did not reopen subsequent decisions merely because the reconsideration notice referred to them.

Under the Universal Credit, Personal Independence Payment, Jobseeker’s Allowance and Employment and Support Allowance (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013, the notification requirement concerned the primary one-month revision limit. It did not require notice of the discretionary extension for late applications.

The Secretary of State appealed against a First-tier Tribunal decision which had allowed T.R.’s appeal against refusal of Personal Independence Payment and awarded the standard mobility component from 6 September 2017 without an end date.

T.R. had made unsuccessful PIP claims in 2017, 2018 and 2020. In 2021, following a LEAP review prompted by changes in PIP law, she sought mandatory reconsideration and appealed. The Secretary of State maintained that only the 2017 decision had been reconsidered and appealed. T.R. contended that all three decisions were within the appeal, or could be challenged because of official error or defective notification.

The central issue was whether the First-tier Tribunal had jurisdiction to make an award extending beyond the period covered by the 2017 decision.

1. Appeal allowed. The First-tier Tribunal erred in law by making an open-ended mobility award. Social-security adjudication proceeds by formal decisions. Under Social Security Act 1998 section 17(1), decisions are final subject to the statutory mechanisms. A tribunal considering an earlier decision cannot make an award that overlaps a later decision on the same benefit.

2. The 2021 LEAP letter, objectively read in its statutory and factual context, concerned only the 2017 decision. The later 2018 and 2020 decisions fell outside the LEAP exercise because they had been made after revised departmental guidance on the relevant test-case decisions. The mandatory reconsideration request, reconsideration notice and appeal consequently concerned only the 2017 decision. References to the later decisions in the reconsideration notice were included for completeness and did not amount to reconsideration of them.

3. The First-tier Tribunal’s jurisdiction therefore ended on 18 October 2018, the day before the second claim. The Upper Tribunal set aside its decision and remade it. T.R. was not entitled to the daily living component, but was entitled to the standard mobility component, on 10 points under descriptor 1d, from 6 September 2017 to 18 October 2018.

4. The further issues were addressed in the alternative. A mandatory reconsideration request made after the ordinary maximum period must in substance rely on official error, and official error must in fact be established. There was no official error in the 2018 decision: failure expressly to mention a general GP letter did not show that it had been ignored. The Secretary of State accepted official error in the 2020 decision, which could be revised separately.

5. Regulation 7(3)(a) of the Universal Credit, Personal Independence Payment, Jobseeker’s Allowance and Employment and Support Allowance (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013 required notification of the primary one-month limit in regulation 5(1), not of the discretionary extension under regulation 6. Article 6 did not apply to the Secretary of State’s administrative decision-making process and, in any event, access to a tribunal had not been impaired.

• Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber): The Secretary of State’s appeal was allowed. The First-tier Tribunal decision was set aside under section 12(2)(a) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 and remade under section 12(2)(b)(ii): [2025] UKUT 1 (AAC).
• First-tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber): On 30 December 2021, it allowed the claimant’s appeal against the 2017 PIP decision and made an indefinite standard-rate mobility award from 6 September 2017 (file no SC242/21/02922).