Compensation Pay Out

[btrobin]

I know of someone who was injured in a RTA, however the driver of the vehicle was uninsured, so the claimant had to revert to the uninsured drivers fund thingy. So as usual, this runs for about three years, during which time claimant is unemployed due to on-going injury, and is on benefits. When the claim is settled the claimant states that all the compensation was paid out to them and then they had to settle, with the benefits office, the repayment of all benefit monies received during the time they were awaiting settlement, and during which time benefits were received.
This seems a bit bizarre as I would have presumed that it would be the solicitor acting for the claimant that would have to allocate the repayment of funds back to the benefit office and not leave it up to the claimant to do it, "as and when".

[Old_Jim]

It's always difficult to comment without knowing the full circumstances of the claim. Someone who is unable to work because of sickness or injury can claim employment and support allowance which is means tested. However, that is based upon your means at the time - not the means you expect to have in the future. If the benefits received were from the emergency loan fund, these would have to be repaid. It's the responsibility of the borrower to repay his loan rather than someone who owes him money.

I suspect that your acquaintance may have been badly advised. Was there actually a solicitor acting for him?

[Peter Pedant]

I am not sure if solicitors would welcome being claims policemen for the clients.

I imagine it is on case-by-case basis - some of the damages will be for food and lodging during the period up to the claim - and so if it works out to be more than benefit levels ( which are crap I can tell you having been on them ) then he wouldnt be entited....

[btrobin]

Yes he did have a solicitor, one of these no win merchants, I know he was on what I term as invalidity benefit as he was unable to work due to the damage to his arm caused by the other party. He also received several interim, smaller, payments during the claim process, so I suspect the MIB admitted liability quite early on, by reason of the fact that they made such interim payments. It is obviously not as straightforward as I was assuming. I was thinking that his solicitor would have received a charge on any compensation pay-out from the benefits office, so as when it was finalised a payment would be made direct from them, and the remainder forwarded to his bank account. Otherwise how would the benefits office know that a settlement had been reached, surely they don't rely on the honesty of the claimant.

[EDDIE51]

If you are on benefits and get compensation the company that pays it has to inform the benefits office how much you have been paid and when. The benefits agency then decided how much if any benefit has to be repaid. My wife got £2250 compensation for an injury and we got a letter from the DWP saying that in this case there would be no deductions. ( it was too low to count against her)
But if she had got say £10,000 then some money would be deducted.

[cassa333]

Benefits sometimes have to be repaid beause the compensation paid is to cover costs incurred while sick or injured. Therefore you would be 'paid' twice for the same thing. Think of it as the benefit is a loan until the compensation is paid out and then the loan is repaid. Or if you had recieved the compansation on day one, benefits would not have been paid to you.