I have a client who has lived in supported accomodation for many years. Initially he had capital over the limit and was paying for both his rent and his care. At the end of 2005 his capital dropped below the threshold and he was awarded HB. However due to an error he continued paying for his care despite being eligible for funding through Supporting People.

Since pointing this error out to them, the trust/authority involved have agreed to pay back the money that was spent on care however this is going to be a substantial amount- well over £16k.

I have found what I hope to be a regulation that would mean this lump sum payment is ignored for HB purposes and therefore allow my client to continue getting HB and care paid for by Supporting People but I wanted to check as I am not an expert in this field at all.

Schedule 6 paragraph 57 of the HB Regs 2006 relating to ignored capital states:

"Any payment made by a local authority ... to or on behalf of the claimant... relating to a service which is provided to develop or sustain the capacity of the claimaint or his partner to live indpendently in his accomodation"

According to CPAG book this relates to Supporting People funding, however I don't suppose that it's the norm for Supporting People to pay someone in a lump sum of over £16k........

Can anyone see that we will run into problems when this money is handed over in relation to his HB claim?

Thanks

In my view, para 57 of Sch 6 will not assist. The money being paid out by (presumably) Supporting People isn't related to a service. It is merely a refund of monies that should not have been paid to them. As such, I can't see how it can (lawfully) be disregarded.

Given the inconsistency of FtTs, you might succeed with an appeal. But, I'd be surprised if the LA didn't take it to Upper Tribunal.

Hmmmmm........I see your point. It just seems so unfair.

Is it not the case that the money he actually paid all those years went to the people who provided the care? So it's not money that went into the Supporting People 'pot', it's money that should have come out of the Supporting People pot. Therefore the money that Supporting People are going to be giving back to him is money that would have been used to pay for his care over all those years and is therefore relating to a service??