I have a tenant that fled her property re violence. She did intend to return if her ex -partner moved from the area, after nine months she now has a permanent property. Can anyone help re: regulations to appeal against Housing Benefit overpayment

A bit more info would help. For example:

- On what basis does the LA say the o/p has arisen?

- At what point (in relation to the 9 month point) did the clmt cease intending to return? Did the clmt's intention(s) change over time? If so, when and how?

- Was there ever any realistic possibility for the clmt to return? Did that change over time?

- Was there any overlapping liability between the "old" and "new" properties? How long?

- If so, was there any delay in moving into the new property? If so, why and for how long?

Sorry if this sounds like a letter from the LA's HB section. But, all of the above is potentially relevant.

She fled to a womans refuge in London July 2008 we were being told via her Social Worker that she intended to return as long as it was safe to do so. Our tenant continued to pay part rent on the property until Dec 09. We then rec'd a call from Social worker stating tnt will no be returning to the property and we have been unable to contact tnt. We know have an overpayment going back to July 08.
Re delay in moving she was still in the refuge in Dec
Basis for LA re overpayment tnt has moved out

Thu 04-Jun-09 08:32 AM by Kevin D

I'm wondering whether or not the clmt notified the LA of her change(s) in circumstances.

My advice is to ask the LA for a FULL statement of reasons and for the following info to be provided:

1) evidence of who notified whom of what and when and, if different, how / when did the LA become aware of the change(s)

2) what regard, if any, has been given to ALL of the provisions under HBR 7, including (but not limited to), the provisions relating to absence through fear of violence.

3) if the LA has decided the clmt had in fact moved, all of the evidence and information relating to the basis of such a conclusion

4) the legal basis on which the LA has decided the o/p is recoverable from the L/L

5) confirmation of whether or not the o/p is also regarded as being recoverable from the clmt. If not, why not?


If a SoR is requested within one month of the date the notification of the decision was sent, the remainder of that month is put on "hold" until the SoR is issued and an appeal can still be made within that remaining time. Or, if that remaining time is less than 14 days, an Appeal can in any case be made within 14 days of the SoR (Schedule 1 to the FtT procedure rules).

On the face of it, if the L/L was not aware of the change and had no reason to suspect, my (strictly initial) view is that the o/p is only recoverable from the clmt, not the L/L - this would follow HBR 101(2), with HBR 101(1) being of no effect.

I know this is late but thank you for your help