16/02/2026
Headline: 📉 THE £16,000 BILL FOR A £400 MISTAKE. WHY EJP IS THE ONLY LOGICAL CHOICE.
The EJP policy for Automatic One-Month Backdating isn't just a "kind idea"; it is a Fiscal Necessity. We use the TR and GD v SSWP [2025] case to prove that the DWP’s current "refusal-first" culture is bankrupting the taxpayer.
The TR and GD v SSWP [2025] Cost Audit
The Dispute: A refusal to backdate or revise a decision (Value: ~£400).
The Judicial Waste:
FTT: 1 Judge + 1 DWP Officer + 2 hours hearing + admin = ~£1,200.
Upper Tribunal: 3 Senior Judges + 2 DWP Senior Counsel + 12 hours hearing + months of judicial prep = ~£15,000+.
Total Taxpayer Loss: Over £16,000 spent to avoid paying £400.
EJP Conclusion: The DWP is effectively spending £40 to save £1. This is a 4,000% failure in fiscal management.
"Citizens,
Critics say we should 'just follow the rules.' I say: Audit the Rules. I have forensically analyzed the 2025 landmark case TR and GD v SSWP. The DWP fought a claimant all the way to a Three-Judge Panel in the Upper Tribunal to avoid paying a small backdated amount.
The Forensic Ledger:
❌ The Benefit at Stake: Approx. £400.
💸 The Litigation Cost: Over £16,000 of YOUR taxpayer money spent on judges and government lawyers.
This is Administrative Insanity. The EJP Constitution mandates the Automatic One-Month Backdating Provision. By removing the 'right to refuse' for the first 30 days, we don't just help families; we save the taxpayer £15,000 per case in wasted court fees.
Stop the waste. Support the Audit.
Stable Families • Stable Society.