header-logo header-logo

Universal credit: a sting in the tail?

11 July 2019 / Norman Challis
Issue: 7848 / Categories: Features , Profession
printer mail-detail

Both claimants & defendants should be aware of the negative impacts of universal credit, says Norman Challis

  • The introduction of universal credit as a recoverable benefit has a negative impact on compensators and claimants alike, and is ripe for much needed reform.
  • As it stands, there are little or no means to challenge Compensation Recovery Unit certificates containing universal credit.
  • The solution may be by both sides of the industry working together to lobby for a legislative change.

The Compensation Recovery Unit (CRU), part of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), exists to recover benefits paid to a claimant injured as a result of another’s negligence. The CRU sends the compensator a Certificate of Recoverable Benefits (CRB) which are repayable in the event that compensation is subsequently awarded or paid. In certain circumstances, compensators can offset some, or all, of the recoverable benefits against claimed losses, and even challenge the recoverability of the benefits themselves, excluding general damages which are ringfenced.

Prior to the creation of universal

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll