Ask a Law Question, Get an Answer ASAP!
Pension Credit which we were on during 2004-2008 meant we would have paid the money back owed at a lower rate if the Pension Service had claimed it when I wrote them in 2008. As they did not respond until 2012, by this time my husband had now drawn his private pension which took us on to Pension Saver Credit, we now have to pay it back at the higher rate. We, therefore, feel we are quite entitled to pay it back at the lower rate - do you agree.
Finally, does "appeal is dismissed" means we have lost our case as we thought, because The Pension Service have recently written us saying our "appeal was heard and allowed". Also who is the "Decision Maker", as they are considering appealing to the Upper Tribunal against the first tier Tribunals decision? And when they get the statement of reasons, they will write us again to let us know whether an appeal to the Upper Tribunal will go ahead.
The paperwork from the court is headed FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL and sub-headed DECISION NOTICE:
1. The appeal is dismissed.
Does this mean we have lost and have to pay, or have we won?
Secondly you did not say who is the "Decision Maker" is it The Pension Service, the Court, or us - please answer both questions.
Letter from The Pension Service says:
We have now been told that your appeal was heard and allowed on 31 January 2014.
The law provides that any party to an appeal can apply for leave to appeal to the Upper Tribunal against a first tier tribunal's decision, if they consider that decision to be wrong in law. This is also explained in the notes you will have received with the first tier tribunal's decision.
I am writing to tell you that the Decision Maker is considering this course of action. As a first step in this process we have requested a statement of reasons from the Tribunal Service.
We will not put the tribunal's decision in place pending a possible appeal to the Upper Tribunal. When we get the statement of reasons, we will write to you again to let you know whether an appeal to the Upper Tribunal will go ahead.
(As far as we are concerned we thought we had lost the appeal and, therefore, are not appealing to the Upper Tribunal - who is right?)
Thank you for your help, you can understand why we have been so confused not understanding all the technicalities and legal terms made it hard for us to grasp whether we had won or lost, especially after receiving the Pension Service's letter.