Good morning

Housing officers, welfare rights advisers, and financial inclusion staff frequently enquire about the expected timescales for responses from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) or local councils regarding Mandatory Reconsideration (MR) requests or Housing Benefit appeals. Unfortunately, there are no statutory or formally prescribed timeframes for these processes. While some cases may be resolved within a few days or weeks, others can take considerably longer, particularly where the circumstances are complicated, or additional evidence is needed or provided in support of the initial request.

If more than two weeks have elapsed without a reply, staff mandated by claimants can act on their behalf by contacting the DWP or relevant Council to check on progress. Where delays appear unreasonable or are causing undue hardship, it is appropriate to make a formal complaint, and, where necessary, escalate.

A recurring issue that has been raised with senior DWP officials is the department’s failure, in many cases, to issue the statutory MR Notice. This notice is intended to set out the Decision-maker’s reasoning for either maintaining or revising a decision. Instead, DWP may simply reverse its decision in accordance with the claimant’s expectations, contact the claimant by telephone to discourage further challenge, or fail to respond to the MR altogether. Similarly, local councils sometimes impede appeals by repeatedly requesting further evidence from claimants or their representatives, or by procrastinating in the hope that the appeal will lapse over time.

When facing such tactics from both authorities, it is effective to treat these as adjudication issues within the appellate process, rather than merely lodging complaints. This approach involves writing to the Tribunal Service to seek the intervention of a District Judge or Legal Officer. For example, in a current Supported Housing Benefit appeal involving twenty-four tenants, both the council and DWP failed to respond to submissions made on their behalf. In response to my request, a Judge has instructed the Council to reply within twenty-eight days, providing reasons for the lack of earlier response, and also directed the Council to submit its response to the appeal within this timeframe. Once these steps are completed, the Judge intends to invite the DWP to participate in the appeal, as it currently pays part of each tenant’s housing costs, pending the outcome.

I know from experience that it’s essential to keep detailed records of all correspondence and attempts to contact the DWP or local authorities, as well as any deadlines that have been set or missed. Such documentation supports any formal requests for intervention or escalation and provides crucial evidence if the matter proceeds to appeal. Adopting a determined and proactive approach in following up outstanding issues can significantly improve the likelihood of a timely resolution for clients, especially where vulnerable individuals or urgent housing needs are involved.

I am running a Zoom session on the morning of Tuesday, 9th December 2025, which addresses some of these issues. If you wish to secure a place on the course contact me or linzi@ucadvice.co.uk. The full details can be found here.

Meanwhile, if you encounter any of these issues and require a bit of advice or support, please contact bill@ucadvice.co.uk or phone 07733 080 389.

Regards

Bill Irvine

UC Advice & Advocacy Ltd

www.ucadvice.co.uk