State pensioners issued major update over DWP 'reinstating' Winter Fuel Payment
State pensioners have been issued a major update over the legal challenge to protect their Winter Fuel Allowance payments after the Labour Party government changed eligibility. A court case brought by Florence and Peter Fanning, from Coatbridge, North Lanarkshire, could mean the £300 payouts are brought back.
The pairare represented by former SNP MP Joanna Cherry KC and Govan Law Centre at the Court of Session in Edinburgh. Ms Cherry said: “The petitioners raised the petition within the policy decision to revoke the winter fuel payments, made on a Great Britain-wide basis, when the Chancellor announced the policy was to be cut.
“Both respondents have failed to comply with a statutory duty with the Equality Act before making a decision to cut the winter fuel payment. The first respondent’s decision to cut the winter fuel payment was based on a Great Britain-wide statistical basis.
READ MORE: Warning issued to Tesco, Sainsbury's, Asda, Morrisons drivers filling up car 'until it clicks'
READ MORE: DWP breaks silence over bringing back £300 pensioner Cost of Living payments
READ MORE UK faces -6C snow blizzard which will begin 'within next 48 hours'
“The first respondent made the decision to cut the winter fuel payment, which resulted in the decision to cut winter fuel payments in Scotland.” Ms Cherry said: “The petitioners have been put in this position by the actions of a government.”
In an update, Judge Lady Hood said: “I’m persuaded that the petitioners should be found liable for the costs of amendment. I would find the petitioners liable for expenses but that liability is as an assisted person.”
The next hearing will be held at the Court of Session in March. Speaking on BBC Radio 5 Live on Thursday 26 September, Martin Lewis said: "If this were to succeed – and there's quite a track record in Scotland of this type of thing going through to challenge Government decisions – it could mean it forces the Government [...] to do an equality impact assessment, which is not quick.
"That would mean they could not impose the universal cut this year, so it would delay it. This is my interpretation: it wouldn't stop it happening, but it would postpone it for a year.
"Of course, this is a legal case, so the chances of success depend on who you listen to. The Govan Law Centre think they've got a decent chance of success of getting this through, [so] there are decisions that need to be made. But it is a very interesting turn in the tale."