Forum Home → Discussion → Housing costs → Thread
1996 Bedroom tax loophole query
I’ve looked at the info we had re this loophole, but can’t see the answer to my question as to whether the couple I thought would be eligible actually are. Can anyone enlighten me please?
Beverley has lived in the house all her life and her mother was originally the tenant, with a continuous claim for HB until she died in 2011 at the age of 90.
In 2000, it was suggested to Beverley that to protect her future and so that she would be able to stay in her home after her mother’s days, she should become a joint tenant with her mother. At the time her husband was working, but he became ill in 2003 and they have had a continuous HB claim ever since.
I originally advised Beverley to appeal against the bedroom tax because she had said there had been a continuous claim for HB. The council have told her that she is not eligible because of there being a gap in HB from 7/5/2000 to 21/7/03, presumably the period while her husband was working.
Anyone able to tell me if this is correct? I had thought that “a” continuous claim of benefit would be enough, but the council appear to be saying she has to have a continuous claim since her own tenancy began. Just want to check they are right in their interpretation.
And then I guess, if, and I’ve only just thought of it so I haven’t asked her, if her husband became a joint tenant when the mother died, might she still be eligible?
Hi
There has to have been a continuous claim to Housing Benefit without any breaks since January 1996. Our LA used their council tax accounts to see if there had been continual benefit entitlement and then assumed hb entitlement based on this as thier hb system did not go back this far. Hope this helps
My understanding is that there has been a continuous claim, but not by the same person. The mother’s claim was continuous to her death in 2011. “Beverley’s” joint app with her husband has been continuous since 2003. I know that you can “inherit” the claim from someone, but does this have to be where you haven’t previously been living there?
No, the opposite: it has to be when you HAVE been living there immediately before the death so “Beverley” ticks that box
I’ve looked at the info we had re this loophole, but can’t see the answer to my question as to whether the couple I thought would be eligible actually are. Can anyone enlighten me please?
Beverley has lived in the house all her life and her mother was originally the tenant, with a continuous claim for HB until she died in 2011 at the age of 90.
In 2000, it was suggested to Beverley that to protect her future and so that she would be able to stay in her home after her mother’s days, she should become a joint tenant with her mother. At the time her husband was working, but he became ill in 2003 and they have had a continuous HB claim ever since.
I originally advised Beverley to appeal against the bedroom tax because she had said there had been a continuous claim for HB. The council have told her that she is not eligible because of there being a gap in HB from 7/5/2000 to 21/7/03, presumably the period while her husband was working.
Anyone able to tell me if this is correct? I had thought that “a” continuous claim of benefit would be enough, but the council appear to be saying she has to have a continuous claim since her own tenancy began. Just want to check they are right in their interpretation.
And then I guess, if, and I’ve only just thought of it so I haven’t asked her, if her husband became a joint tenant when the mother died, might she still be eligible?
When I posed this question before I had some helpful answers, but the council concerned are taking the view that my client “had a separate claim from her late mother and therefore there is no continuing benefit”. Anyone got any more information for me? Can you think of any reason why she might not be exempted under the 1996 provision? thanks.
I think if she had succeeded to her mothers tenancy when her mother died in 2011 she would have been covered as her mother was on HB until her death and then daughter was on HB from her mothers death till now. As she instead became a joint tenant with her mother back in 2003 she would have had to be on HB from date of becoming JT. As she worked until 2003 and didn’t get HB until then I don’t think she will be covered by pre 1996 rule.
[ Edited: 19 Aug 2014 at 03:43 pm by JoW ]I think Mum’s receipt of HB up until the succession is enough to trigger the loophole. Para 6(b) to schedule 3 to HB & CTB (CP) regs looks at the date of death and sucession, anything before the succession is irrelevant as long as the party from who the tenancy succeeds was in receipt of HB from ‘96
Don’t forget that the refusal should carry a right of appeal so probably best; rather than us lot brainiacing, to let the FtT decide it in a marginal case like this.