Please can someone offer me a glimmer of hope! I have a client who accepted a property with a H/A. He has a spinal injury and needs continuous care. I discussed the possibility of benefit prior to occ because of adaptations, however because there are so many agencies involved with his care and the care needs to be specialised he has not yet been able to move in. He has £900 arrears and the H/A are about to issue an NSP. Does anyone know anyway around the benefit prior to occ rule which may help him?
Thanks Lucy

Why bhas he not been able to move in ...is the property not habitable because of the work being carried out on his behalf ? or is it because the authorities cannot put together the package of care needed?
where is he living at present ? is he having rent paid at his present address?

The property is habitable it's because the authorities have not yet put together the package of care needed. At the moment he is a respite care facility. I am not sure if this care is being funded by the local authority.

So, from what you are saying it would appear that a social worker has allowed a client to sign a tenancy agreement before knowing whether or not there would be a care package in place, which would be sufficient to allow this gentleman to take up residence? If that is the case, then your client has been seriously let down by those upon whom he is totally reliant, and as a direct consequence is now in severe financial trouble - not only does he owe the outstanding rent but also the C/Tax as well. How long has he been waiting to move in ?

tenancy commenced on the 23.3.08, I have been badgering his social worker since the start and explained that we could apply for benefit for 4 weeks prior to move in on the bases that there was an adaptation to be done (shower needed to be made larger) I got the impression that she was a bit anoyed that i kept ringing to see if he had a moving in date yet. I think she now realises why i kept going on to her about his housing benefit. I think too many agencies have been involved with trying to sort out care needs and none of them have considered the concequences of him signing the tenancy, the H/A were not made aware of the fact that it may have been a while before he could move in or they would have stressed the fact that rent still needed to be paid.

Sounds like maladministration by the LA.. could this be a complaint to the LGO.. Hopefully with a view that the LGO makes the LA comensate him to the costs of the arrears..???

Is there not an argument that if the home is not fit for him that he should not be liable to pay rent and that would negate the HB issue? It seems odd that he would be asked to sign a tenancy when presumably they accept that until they have completed the works he cannot move in? i had a similar issue once and we argued, eventually that the LA should amend the start date of the tenancy, is there also not a DDA argument?

Did he move in property into the property before he moved in? there was a recent CD about this and counts as occupying the home then up to 13 weeks temp absence?

Mon 14-Jul-08 10:38 AM by Kevin D

The CD in question is R(H) 09/05 (aka CH/2957/2004).

However, the outcome of the CD was dependent on the facts of that particular case. In my view, based on the info given so far, the CD will not necessarily support an argument that the property is/was "occupied" in the case described in the OP.

if any possessions placed into the falt was what i was getting at i.e. count then as normally occupying the flat