Turkish couple with 6mth old baby. Father has British passport and wife was smuggled into the country no right to reside
father has claimed CB and income-based JSA as single claimant. They have now been offered homeless accommodation - how would this go for hb/ctb if wife on claim when no recourse to public funds and national insurance issue?
Any help or guidance much appreciated

The first hurdle is the NINO requirement. The partner MUST either:

1) have a NINO; OR
2) provide such info / evidence to enable one to be allocated to her.

Note that the NINO requirement MUST be satisfied for BOTH the clmt AND partner. If not, NIL HB/CTB regardless of any other consideration.

If/when the NINO hurdle is crossed, the partner counts as a partner for HB/CTB purposes, irrespective of her immigration status.

Hope this helps.

This is so, and the LA should refer the wife to the local Jobcentre for an interview to get a national insurance number, under their own guidance.
The next, and possibly insurmountable, problem is the "no recourse to public funds". While the husband is entitled to JSA and so will be entitled to have all of his rent covered by housing benefit, then the LA can pay housing benefit. The fact of his wife being part of his household will not give him any extra public funds, that he would not otherwise have got if he was single.
If however he is only entitled to a proportion of his housing benefit, then the LA will not be able to pay him anything. This is because the housing benefit calculation rules do not allow the LA to ingore his wife for HB purposes (the rule is different for JSA and IS). They would have to include his wife in the calculation and this would fall foul of the "no recourse to public funds" rule.
See Commissioners Decision R(H)7/06. Also reported as Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Wilson <2006> EWCA Cib 882 (Court of Appeal decision).
As you might have guessed, I've had an appeal on just this kind of issue recently!

PFA is not one of my strong points, but I'm not sure Toxteth is right when suggesting that the clmt's wife has to have recourse to public funds in her own right. It may well be the case for IS/JSA purposes, but I didn't think this was the same for HB/CTB.

Assuming the NINO hurdle is crossed by the ptnr, and so long as the claim is made by the clmt, my understanding is the ptnr does not need recourse to public funds (in her own right) in order for HB/CTB to be payable to the clmt. Bear in mind, that in HB/CTB, there can only be one claimant - there is no such thing as a joint claim. For HB/CTB, the applicable amount should include the couples' allowance as normal.

If my understanding is wrong, it would be much appreciated if someone can cite regs / legal references (specific to HB/CTB) - thanks.

What worries me about this case is that she is an illegal immigrant. She isn't subject to a condition not to resort to public funds since that will be attached to her grant of leave to enter the country and she hasn't got one. I don't like to think what might happen if she comes to the attention of IND - unless she already has, of course. But applying even for a NINO might be dangerous in the circs. Someone is bound to want to see her passport...

Wed 05-Mar-08 10:15 AM by Martin_Williams

The wife does not have any restriction for immigration purposes on recoursing to public funds as Ariadne says. She is simply a person who "requires leave to enter or remain in the UK but does not have it".

That means that the wife is a "person subject to immigration control" ("PSIC") for the purposes of sec 115 of the Imm and Asy Act 1999. Accordingly usually she could claim any of the benefits listed in that section (all of them....).

It is important to realise that being excluded from benefit in this way is not about having no recourse to public funds (which is a condition placed on some peoples leave to be in the UK) but because she comes within the PSIC definition. Accordingly unless having a no recourse to funds condition is what makes the person a PSIC (that is one of the 4 categories of PSICs) then claiming benefits should not affect immigration status.....

HOWEVER:

The wife is the family member of an EU national (her husband) accordingly, despite being a PSIC she can claim DLA, CA or CB.

If the wife was "lawfully present" (ie by making an asylum claim and getting temp. admission) in the UK then she would also be able to claim IS (despite being PSIC) etc as she is a Turkish national....(Szoma etc) however..... it seems that she might then fail to qualify for benefits on the basis that she fails to be able to show she has a right to reside..... (mind twisting).

BUT as HB is claimed by the husband and only he needs to show a R to R and not a PSIC then provided she can apply for the NINO things for HB are fine.