Have been told that as a result of the Rent Service creating one huge area (BRMA) for the introduction of LHA next April, the local reference rent area here has been changed from 29 october to reflect that area. In Newcastle we have higher rents that any other areas in the new BRMA/local reference rent area. But the median/mid point is now likely to be lower taking into account the effect of combining Newcastle with these other cheaper areas.

The effect is that there are potentially over 1,000 private tenant HB claimants whose HB will go down when their local ref rent is re-assessed, either at the 52 week point or when there has been a relevant change in circs. Actual example of this - IS claimant has seen HB go down by £15pw. They already get a DHP. The council is very unlikely to be able to pick up these decreases through additional or increased DHPs.

This will also have an effect on LHA claimants in Newcastle when this comes in in April. But may be good news for private tenants in the cheaper areas!

Thought I would post this here, not because there is much we can do about it, but in case anyone else finds themselves in a similar situation.

This is happening all over the country. Whilst it is often mentioned in relation to LHA, it is happening now and will therefore affect reference rents. Brighton and Hove is being put in an enormous BRMA taking in large swathes of East and West Sussex which will drive rent figures down (it's a bit different for us as we've been running LHA for 4 years as a "Pathfinder" authority).

I believe that some LAs have been engaged in some frantic "lobbying" of local rent services to try to mitigate the effects.

I have noticed this sort of thing too.

I also kind of expected something similar when I read that "under Lha nobodys Housing Benefit will decrease".


Now we know how that statement could be made.

What's the legal basis for the Rent Service to do this? Yes, I can see the administrative case for changing boundaries now but is it lawful? I doubt it.

"Locality" (which determines the LRR) has a different definition in the legislation to "Broad Rental Market Area" because locality requires the Rent Service to base these on local neighbourhoods (i.e. a residential part of a town or city) as opposed to basing the area on the broader BRMA definition of two or more distinct areas of accommodation.

So at first sight, what's happening is wrong.

It might be worth exploring the scope for a judicial review of the Rent Service for doing this and it may be worth talking to The Public Law Project. A group of LAs could collaborate on funding a JR to minimise risks and/or individuals affected could take action.

Presumably this has implications for the lawfulness of any LRR determinations until next April? It also has implications for the tenants whose HB will be cut.

Fri 11-Jan-08 09:22 AM by ken

Edited to shorten link

Looks like Westminster got in there first.

See Rightsnet news story:

Introduction of revised HB localities in London delayed: New DWP guidance (09 January, 2008)

The "Heffernan" case may well yet have an impact. Although the Rent Service were successful at the Court of Appeal, leave has been sought to the House of Lords by Mr Heffernan.

house of lords judgment in heffernan out today .... mr h's appeal allowed ... summary in rightsnet news later

in the meantime, here's the full judgment ...

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldjudgmt/jd080730/heffer-1.htm