All state pensioners could keep their £200 to £300 Winter Fuel Payments after all, Martin Lewis has announced.
A legal challenge has been launched by a charity against the government’s decision to scrap universal Winter Fuel Payments for all pensioners and make them means tested.
It comes after Labour announced that the Winter Fuel Payment of £200, or £300 for over 80s, would be switched to means testing and only those on Pension Credit or other low income benefits would receive it this winter.
If the challenge is successful it will render the decision to take away Winter Fuel Payments unlawful in its current form and force the government to go back to square one with an impact assessment on how it may affect pensioners before the change can go ahead, meaning all state pensioners will get their Winter Fuel Payment this winter after all.
Martin Lewis tweeted: “Winter Fuel Payments could be reinstated for ALL pensioners this winter if new legal challenge succeeds – here’s what you need to know.”
He then linked to his Money Saving Expert website where the details were explained.
It said: “Millions of pensioners could see their Winter Fuel Payments reinstated this winter as a charity has launched legal proceedings against the UK Government, aiming to reverse its decision to restrict the payments to those on certain benefits. It’s still very early days and there are no guarantees, but here’s what you need to know.
A type of legal claim known as judicial review has been mounted in Scotland’s highest court, the Court of Session, by Govan Law Centre (GLC). The case has been raised on behalf of a pensioner couple living in Scotland who will be ineligible for the Winter Fuel Payments following changes announced in July.
“However, while the case is being raised in Scotland, its outcome could also apply in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, as the Court could strike down the UK-wide regulations which brought the changes into force.”
The legal challenge is using the Equality Act 2010 to argue that the changes discriminate against older people.
It adds: “If the Court finds that the Government didn’t fulfil its duties under the Equality Act 2010, or didn’t follow procedural fairness by failing to consult pensioners, then this would render its decision to restrict the payments as unlawful.
The Court could then void the regulations which brought the changes into effect and order the Government to do a full impact assessment. This would take us back to the position we would have been in before the policy was announced.”
