Good morning

I recently wrote about the DWP’s Targeted Review of Universal Credit claims and awards, which is being implemented nationwide. This latest bulletin highlights several concerning features regarding the handling of cases by the Enhanced Review (ERT) and “Complaints and Resolutions” (CRT) teams. Both have caused significant disruption to Universal Credit (UC) housing costs, concerning new claims and existing awards, particularly in London and Southern England. The nationwide process, expanded to cover 8 million awards by 2028, frequently results in payments being withheld or cancelled without legal justification

Case Study:

The case was handled on behalf of a website member, whose tenant moved into a property in May 2025. Despite the landlord’s agent helping to make the claim, validate the AST and provide proof of occupation, DWP refused to pay the Housing Costs Element (HCE), and without issuing a formal refusal letter, the DWP:

  • Updated the UC journal with “HCE not approved” without providing any explanation or statutory notice giving rights of appeal.
  • Repeatedly asked for “resubmissions” of the same evidence and failed to act on multiple Mandatory Reconsideration (MR) requests.
  • Ignored the claimant’s signed mandate, confirming the appointment of their representative and “explicit consent”, authorising DWP to engage with the representative to progress their claim. DWP’s own guidance to staff recognises the importance of “having good working relationships with representatives”, but did not attempt to contact the representative, preferring instead to post To-dos on the journal, overlooking the claimant’s obvious difficulties.

Partial Payment & Procedural Obstruction

Following escalation to the Secretary of State for Work & Pensions and Group Director, DWP finally paid the housing costs—but only for December 2025 onwards. They refused to pay the arrears for May–November 2025, claiming the December payment “concluded the dispute,” despite no Mandatory Reconsideration (MR) Notice being issued.

Key Issues for Landlords to Note:

  1. Systemic Failure of the ERT: The Enhanced Review Team is bypassing the law by failing to issue statutory notifications. Mandatory Reconsideration requests, posted on the claimant’s journal, are being ignored or taking months to secure an outcome. Without an MR Notice, the tenant is ordinarily legally barred from pursuing their case to an Independent Tribunal. However, an upper-tier case of Judge Wikely’s (paras  24-26) explains the critical importance of DWP decisions being accompanied by formal notices, explaining the grounds for refusal, rights of appeal and timelines. Failure to comply permits the claimant to appeal directly to the Tribunal Service.
  2. Deliberate Communication Gaps: DWP’ s “Complaints and Resolution Team) is increasingly bypassing professional representatives and landlord agents, even when a signed mandate is on file, confirming the appointment and consent to exchange and share information with the representative. DWP’s actions are causing vulnerable tenants  (e.g. through age, disability, ill health, or language difficulties) to misinterpret journal “To-do” posts or fail to respond to information requests promptly.
  3. The “Current Month” tactic: Landlords should be wary of the DWP paying only the most recent month’s liabilities while ignoring Benefit Assessment Period (BAP) entitlement for earlier periods. Contrary to DWP’s mistaken belief, it can’t “settle” or “close” claims or awards, without addressing the arrears issue. One of its senior staff advised us that part of the reason for overlooking the earlier period is because, DWP’s “agile” IT system, requires manual intervention and a separate payment arrangement.

Protect Your Rental Income

  • Journal posts saying “HCE not approved” or “case closed” are not a legally competent decision, without a notification. So, demand a Mandatory Reconsideration and if that doesn’t work, appeal directly to the Tribunal Service. I have created 2 separate templates for that purpose.
  • Similalrly, if the ERT asks for the same document more than once, escalate to the Service Leader or Group Director immediately. Often, minor discrepancies can be quickly resolved by DWP explaining its concerns to the tenant, their representative or landlord, and providing an opportunity to respond.  

Documenting the “Official Error”: Record each instance when evidence is uploaded as DWP maintains wrongly, it must delete documents already viewed and used. Should the DWP eventually issue a payment, these records should confirm that payment is applied retrospectively. Although DWP may argue otherwise, “Good cause” does not apply here because your request for payment doesn’t involve a period before the original claim date.

  • Engage MPs: In this situation, advancement occurred only once the Secretary of State became involved. If the DWP refuses to issue a statutory notice, or Mandatory Reconsideration (MRN) Notice it is acting ultra vires (outside its legal power) and obructing justice.

Summary for Members: The Targeted Review process is designed to prevent overpayments and fraud, which we support. But many of the staff involved in the process are not being properly trained or supported and, consequently, are wrongly refusing or delaying payment of the housing costs, causing rent arrears, the instigation of repossession action, and considerable worry and anxiety for tenants and landlords alike; most landlords need the rental income to service mortgages, repairs and maintenance costs.

So, if your tenant’s housing costs are “not approved”, or case is “closed” these constitutes unfavourable outcomes, meriting a formal notice with rights of appeal (not a complaint, as DWP suggests). Ask DWP to provide a written Statement of Reasons, and if it fails to comply or you remain dissatisfied, appeal directly to the Tribunal Service. I have created some standard templates for clients which I’m using in training sessions.

Few, if any, of these appeals will progress to a hearing, as when DWP passes the Tribunal evidence to more savvy Presenting Officers they tend to quickly raise the white flag in advance of the scheduled hearing. In the case cited above, DWP will eventually concede or be overturned by a First-tier tribunal.

If you need to clarify any part of this note, please email bill@ucadvice.co.uk or phone 07733 080 389.

Regards

Bill Irvine

UC Advice & Advocacy Ltd

www.ucadvice.co.uk