Forum Home → Discussion → Housing costs → Thread
Bedroom Tax exemption revision
Hi
Just wondering if anyone had come a cross a case where a tenant had been granted an exemption based on their need for an overnight carer and the 4 months on the exemption has been cancelled and the tenant has to pay for the extra room. No change in any circumstances whatsoever!
thanks
The Cou8ncil cannot arbitrarily change its mind about this - it needs grounds either for revision or supersession. You say there has been no change of circumstance so all that leaves is revision of the original decision. The question then is: what was wrong with the original decision? There is room for judgement in overnight care cases and if a quality checker feels that the original decision was generous but still viable on the facts then they are stuck with it. But if the rules were not applied correctly (for example there is not in fact a spare bedroom for the carer to use, or the person who requires overnight care is not the claimant/partner/JT) the decision can be revised on the ground of official error.
My question to the Council therefore would be: what is your ground for revision? At the same time as lodging an appeal of course to protect the claimant’s options.
This case has now reached an appeal stage and the council are relying on the revision was due to an official error on their part. The error being that the exemption was granted without a medical professional supplying a letter stating the need for overnight care, although the tenant was in receipt of both high rate DLA care and mobility. The tenant was unable to obtain a letter as her GP refused to give one on the basis she was a GP and treated patients and did not write letters. The council where aware of this at the time they granted the exemption and said that a letter from the said carer and a list of medications would suffice. This was provided.
This case has now reached an appeal stage and the council are relying on the revision was due to an official error on their part. The error being that the exemption was granted without a medical professional supplying a letter stating the need for overnight care, although the tenant was in receipt of both high rate DLA care and mobility. The tenant was unable to obtain a letter as her GP refused to give one on the basis she was a GP and treated patients and did not write letters. The council where aware of this at the time they granted the exemption and said that a letter from the said carer and a list of medications would suffice. This was provided.
does this council as a general rule look to waste time and money?
ive dealt with a few scottish councils on this and they really dont seem to bother that much as long as the person has the right benefit and an over night carer willing to say they do so.
I cant see what benefit reducing a residents housing benefit entitlement has to the resident or the council.
That is nowhere near good enough on its own. The Council is saying it made a hasty decision based on insufficient evidence, which was an official error: that is shaky enough, but it begs the question .... so what? How would the decision have been different if they had sought further evidence? Why do they think the claimant is not entitled to an extra bedroom? Is it because there is no doctor’s letter or because the facts indicate s/he should not have an extra room? If the facts do indicate that s/he should not have an extra room, what new facts have come to light that were unknown to the Council at the time?
It sounds to me very much as if the Council is trying to change its mind about the merits of its original decision with the flimsiest of grounds for revision.