council tax support limited to 6 months if on JSA?

Seems to be Leeds CC’s official scheme - See para 32(7A) and para 16B of the policy (in documents at bottom of this page).

http://www.leeds.gov.uk/residents/Pages/Council-Tax-Support-from-April-2013.aspx

I don’t think it’s illegal on the face of it - the idea of local schemes replacing CTB was to encourage LAs to have flexibility in deciding who gets reduced council tax. It does seem redundant (and probably costly) to require claimants who are already under the JSA scheme to go through yet more “back to work” stuff.

and what then if what the council want is then in conflict with what the jobcentre is having the person do?  rock and hard place and sanctions all round?

Leeds website says they “will never suggest any activities that duplicate or conflict with actions in your Jobcentre Plus work plan.” Though if a jobsearch is meant to be a full-time occupation I’m not sure what more they can be asking people to do.

The consultation document for this scheme here is worth a read. It mentions that they sought Counsel’s opinion, which confirmed that they have the power to impose this conditionality.

Ahh - I see.
had never come across this before so I was confused - I wonder if this is something that will be adopted across other local authorities in time….

thanks for your help. :)

Job search on JSA is still not a full time occupation as the 35hr default for UC has not found its way into the JSA Regulations .  Indeed the default for JSA is still “more than two steps” in any week.

Maybe Leeds did get the opinion of Counsel, but that may still be the opinion of a single barrister and wrong.

Its my guess that this sort of conditionality in council tax support which is additional to that for JSA is ultra vires.

Anyone who gets their council tax reduction terminated would have a right to appeal to the VT (just as they do with discretionary reductions under S13A- see what seems to be the little known VT decision SC and CW v East Riding of Yorkshire)

The East Riding decision was made by the President Professor Graham Zellick QC and has not been challenged in the higher courts.

Appealing to the VT may be easier, cheaper and less risky than JR in the circumstances and I suspect that if there are enough appeals, the Leeds scheme could be made unworkable

Stainsby - 28 September 2016 04:59 PM

Job search on JSA is still not a full time occupation as the 35hr default for UC has not found its way into the JSA Regulations .  Indeed the default for JSA is still “more than two steps” in any week.

Quite right, sorry, I had my UC head on there.

Anyone who gets their council tax reduction terminated would have a right to appeal to the VT (just as they do with discretionary reductions under S13A- see what seems to be the little known VT decision SC and CW v East Riding of Yorkshire

Just to be clear, I don’t think the VT would entertain an appeal directly based on grounds of “this scheme is ultra vires”. As per this discussion, it would have to be more like: “I have raised a complaint to the council that they have refused to write a debt off under s13A(1)(c). This was refused, but I maintain that it’s unreasonable for me to pay this sum”.

The appeal to the VT would be on the lines of “I asked for a review of the decision that I now owe £x and this was refused.  I think this decision is wrong because…..”

You can then raise the vires argument to the Tribunal

Isn’t that scuppered since the LGFA 1992 was amended in 2012, so that the legality of a CTR scheme can only be challenged by JR? See end of schedule 4:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/17/contents/enacted

5 (1) Section 66 (matters to be questioned only by judicial review) is amended as
follows.
(2) After subsection (2)(b) insert—
“(ba) a council tax reduction scheme, or any revision of such a
scheme;”.

I must confess that this was something I had overlooked.