Forum Home → Discussion → Housing costs → Thread
Bedroom tax loophole - hadn’t thought of this one before
forum member
Sunderland West Advice Project
Total Posts: 1004
Joined: 22 June 2010
“Clarify the position” = Newspeak for “We will see if this is right, and if so we will rush through a rather quick change in regulations to counter it”
forum member
Director - HBINFO, North Yorkshire
Total Posts: 101
Joined: 29 July 2010
A number of LA’s have run reports on the likely numbers affected…and have found no cases. It is a very long time after all ...and most such claimants will now be of pensionable age so excluded from bedroom tax anyway.
Helpful to the few affected cases I agree….although nationaly there is a stack of unclaimed DHP monies available and LA’s can even claim MORE cash (see A18/2013). But they must do so by 3 February 2014…....
forum member
Benefits consultant/trainer - hbanorak.co.uk, East London
Total Posts: 2929
Joined: 12 March 2013
Document containing legal analysis of this issue available to download here (Word 97-03.doc and 07.docx versions)
File Attachments
- Eligible_rent_1996_v4.docx (File Size: 28KB - Downloads: 2913)
- Eligible_rent_1996_v4.doc (File Size: 49KB - Downloads: 6546)
Thanks Peter
forum member
Director - HBINFO, North Yorkshire
Total Posts: 101
Joined: 29 July 2010
U1 issued tonight by DWP accepts the problem. Some LA’s are now reporting numbers of around 80 to 100 possible cases. All will need to be revised from April 2013; but many cases are incomplete. The FTT decision I saw made a “balance of probability” decision that the claimant was in continuous entitlement since 1996.
Quite extraordinary….
here’s U1/2014 ... see attached ...
File Attachments
- 1563-Bulletin_U1-2014.doc (File Size: 93KB - Downloads: 6859)
forum member
Deputy Manager, Reading Community Welfare Rights Unit
Total Posts: 1711
Joined: 16 June 2010
Cool!!
Actually, there may be a fair few of these cases. After all, social housing tenants tend to be fairly static and 1996 isn’t all that long ago really. But, then, I think of the 1980’s as being recent…
forum member
Welfare rights officer - Enable Scotland
Total Posts: 873
Joined: 22 August 2013
1964 - 09 January 2014 08:14 AMCool!!
Actually, there may be a fair few of these cases. After all, social housing tenants tend to be fairly static and 1996 isn’t all that long ago really. But, then, I think of the 1980’s as being recent…
I was born in the 80’s if that helps.
as predicted by benefits adviser, see that DWP says it will be ‘taking steps to remedy this shortly’ and talks about revising people’s ben for period up to when legislation amended.
Nearly Legal says ‘very well done indeed’ to HBAnorak for spotting loophole -
http://nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/2014/01/bedroom-tax-pre-1996-claims-exemption/
forum member
Benefits consultant/trainer - hbanorak.co.uk, East London
Total Posts: 2929
Joined: 12 March 2013
I shouldn’t really take too much credit, this came from an appeals officer who asked me about a Tribunal directions notice. Because she is very anxious not to appear to be taking sides in a political debate she doesn’t want me to reveal the name of her LA or the Tribunal venue. But it’s the Judge who spotted this one, not me.
Have to admit I am enjoying the kudos today though!
forum member
Team leader of Financial and Social Inclusion - Karbon Homes, Newcastle
Total Posts: 92
Joined: 16 May 2011
Top tip- identify pre 1st Jan 1996 under occupying tenants on 2 weekly payment cycles- new claims for HB went to a 4 weekly payment cycle in October 1996. This isn’t foolproof, as there will be protected claimants on 4 weekly cycles, too, but it should identify the definitely exempt quickly and get the exemptions before the HB offices get bogged down with lots of requests.
[ Edited: 13 Jan 2014 at 10:53 pm by Lee Forrest ]forum member
Deputy Manager, Reading Community Welfare Rights Unit
Total Posts: 1711
Joined: 16 June 2010
HB Anorak - 09 January 2014 12:19 PMI shouldn’t really take too much credit, this came from an appeals officer who asked me about a Tribunal directions notice. Because she is very anxious not to appear to be taking sides in a political debate she doesn’t want me to reveal the name of her LA or the Tribunal venue. But it’s the Judge who spotted this one, not me.
Have to admit I am enjoying the kudos today though!
As well you should be! Richly deserved say I.
Stevenmcavoy: You’d be amazed how little that helps. If I didn’t feel old before I do now. Do you realise I was probably already a welf when you were born? And I still know b****er all.
forum member
Welfare rights officer - Enable Scotland
Total Posts: 873
Joined: 22 August 2013
1964 - 09 January 2014 02:00 PMHB Anorak - 09 January 2014 12:19 PMI shouldn’t really take too much credit, this came from an appeals officer who asked me about a Tribunal directions notice. Because she is very anxious not to appear to be taking sides in a political debate she doesn’t want me to reveal the name of her LA or the Tribunal venue. But it’s the Judge who spotted this one, not me.
Have to admit I am enjoying the kudos today though!
As well you should be! Richly deserved say I.
Stevenmcavoy: You’d be amazed how little that helps. If I didn’t feel old before I do now. Do you realise I was probably already a welf when you were born? And I still know b****er all.
I think clients and the dwp have a great ability to come up with scenarios that keep us on our toes.
I admire the knowledge of people on here and the workers on the CPAG line in Scotland as usually when you turn to either for help its one of those cases that takes about half an hour just to properly explain.
I did have my own where does the time go moment in a previous post when I advised a then pregnant client only to speak to her again when the child was about to start school.
forum member
Welfare benefits caseworker, Mary Ward Legal Centre
Total Posts: 148
Joined: 18 October 2013
Top story on the Guardian website now.
Thousands of people have been wrongly identified as liable for the bedroom tax, including some who now face eviction or have been forced to move to a smaller property, as a result of an error by Department of Work and Pensions.
Housing experts believe as many as 40,000 people could be affected by the mistake. The DWP says it believes only a “small number” of tenants are affected, which it estimates number 5,000.
All could be eligible for refunds worth on average at least £640 per claimant and millions in aggregate.
The error affects working age tenants in social housing who have occupied the same home continuously since 1996. An oversight by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) when drafting the legislation means that the housing benefit regulations dating from 1996 were not updated when the coalition legislated for the bedroom tax.
Bedroom tax loophole could exempt 40,000 wrongly identified as liable