Meeting note for 9 February 2026

The slide pack is too large to send by email this week. Please download it from is page, alongside the recording and other related reports. The pack is large because it contains significant slides on CTR case law and the Gunning principles.

Malcolm Gardner opened with tributes to John Roberts, noting his kindness and contribution to the profession, and offered condolences to his wife Gill and family.

This session centred on what the latest Council Tax Reduction (CTR) judicial reviews are telling us about scheme design, governance, and operational delivery. The discussion moved between legal risk (including consultation standards and equality impacts), practical scheme mechanics (especially transitional protection and banded schemes), and delivery realities (software constraints and governance routes). We also began a focused conversation on support for people who are terminally ill, including the role of SR1 evidence.

What recent CTR case law is signalling

Malcolm Gardner opened the discussion by asking whether there is now a clear pattern across the judicial reviews, and what councils should do differently as a result.

Rachael Walker emphasised that as more challenges become public, more schemes are likely to be tested, and councils should treat this as a live risk, particularly in the context of local government reorganisation and harmonisation.

Gareth Morgan shared a recent example of a council seeking an external “scheme check” because they were not confident, they understood whether their scheme was compliant, nor confident that the supplier would identify issues.

Sean O’Sullivan argued that councils should have embedded the lessons on lawful consultation by now, given how established the Gunning principles are, and criticised the cost and judgement of extensive litigation in the Three Rivers matter.

Consultation, governance, and the Gunning principles

Malcolm Gardner highlighted the recurring governance issue of whether schemes are properly approved, including the importance of full council decision making where required, and flagged the relevance of the Gunning principles to CTR consultation and decision processes.

Equality impact assessment and PSED risk

Rachael repeatedly returned to the quality of equality impact assessments (EIAs) as a weak point, suggesting that stronger EIAs would have surfaced many of the risks that have since become litigation. She also suggested that where councils identify unintended disadvantage early, cost it, and provide support while committing to scheme correction at the next available point, this may reduce challenge risk by evidencing responsible action.

Tom Clark expressed concern that meaningful EIA training is not consistently in place, and that poor quality assessments are not adequate in light of the public sector equality duty.

Transitional protection and scheme mechanics

Paul Howarth discussed where transitional protection issues become most acute, particularly where income banded schemes take account of wider unearned income and warned about risks such as double counting and discriminatory effects when importing Universal Credit elements into CTR calculations. He also noted that discretionary support cannot “cure” a discriminatory main scheme, although discretionary measures may be the only practical mitigation in year where schemes cannot be changed mid cycle.

James Johnston described operational impacts where transitional protection is taken into account, including severe award reductions and band threshold effects during managed migration, and noted the challenge where councils have set “no change” years.

Penny Mitchell explained that their authority is building a transitional protection disregard into the scheme next year, with interim protections in use this year, and highlighted a forward risk where changes in Universal Credit components affect whether transitional protection remains in place and how income appears in CTR assessment.

Naomi Armstrong shared that their approach avoids the Universal Credit income issue by not taking Universal Credit income into account in the scheme. She also described a practical review approach: focus on “who gets more and who gets less”, iterate, identify outliers early, and ensure the EIA clearly records what is changing and why.

Nicki Duckworth contributed sector intelligence on how common it is for councils to disregard transitional protection.

Systems, suppliers, and accountability

Laura Bessell offered a strong defence of benefits managers, noting that scheme design, consultation, equality analysis, legal risk, and system constraints often sit across multiple teams, and that benefits leads may not be trained as legal specialists or supported with enough time and resources. She also raised the practical constraint of software and implementation timelines and asked for examples of stronger EIA templates.

Gareth Morgan questioned why known calculation problems can take so long to fix in some supplier environments, suggesting the underlying issue can be a lack of leadership drive to address defects early, and again linked stronger EIA practice to reduced litigation risk.

Malcolm Gardner stressed that system limitations should not be treated as an explanation for outcomes, and that councils remain accountable for irrational or discriminatory effects.

Support for people who are terminally ill

The group began a focused discussion on support for terminal illness within CTR, including practical questions around evidence and administration.

Gareth Morgan emphasised the importance of the SR1 form and the practical challenge of ensuring clinicians understand what it is intended to evidence, rather than treating it as a requirement to predict death within a fixed timeframe.

Malcolm Gardner opened with tributes to John Roberts, noting his kindness and contribution to the profession, and offered condolences to his wife Jill and family.

Note

Arriving in March 2026, Using AI in Revenues and Benefits Services
A practical series of 60-to-90-minute online sessions for Revenues and Benefits teams, focused on using AI safely and effectively across writing, enquiries, quality checking, take up campaigns, data insight, and governance guardrails.

Register interest at info@visionarynetwork.co.uk.

The Independent Revenues & Benefits Discussion Group continues to provide a vital forum for expert analysis, shared learning, and open debate at a time of significant policy flux.

For more information or to join future sessions, contact Malcolm Gardner at Visionary Network. info@visionarynetwork.co.uk The weekly meeting link is here

Slide pack and recording

Recording can be accessed from here

Please note that the handout contains additional slides covering other items of interest in the news and job adverts, which are provided in partnership with Business Smart Solutions (https://www.businesssmartsolutions.co.uk/).