HB and exempt accommodation

I am sure that recently i saw case law which indicated that although a landlord may not be providing a high level of support themselves, that if their support was taken into account alongside other support provided eg. by social servcies through a care package; then this total support situation could be consdiered enough to rgard the accommodation as exempt.
this was even though the landlord proportion of the support had been classed as minimal by the local authority.
Now i cannot find details of this anywhere and am starting to think i must have imagined it!
I have searched the case law on the site, and looked elsewhere, but no luck.

Does anyone else recall this, and can anyone point me in the right direction to find the case?

Pretty sure you have imagined that one Sharon.  The UT has consistently found pretty much the opposite of that: existence of a commissioned care package from Adult Services will often squeeze the landlord out: it places the onus on the landlord to demonstrate that it has a residual more-than-minimal support role.  See for example R(H) 4/09 at para 19.

Thanks Peter! I thought that might be the case, obviously wishful thinking!

I know this topic had been done to death but looking for opinions on the following situation:

The owner of the property is a private individual. (a)
An organisation (b) , who provides care support and supervison to a tenant, has a tenancy agreement with the owner of the property £80.00 per week. Just a bog standard agreement.

The claimant (c) has an agreement with the organisation (b) who provides the CSS £255 per week.

So is landlord of the property, the owner (a) or the organisation (b) who provides the css?

Basically, this tenant has been turfed out of homeless accomodation for asb, and homeless welfare won’t re house him because he has made himself intentionally homeless. It’s clear he really could do with the css but the phrase ‘an organisation that is only involved in arranging, or facilitating the provison of accommodation along with the care support or supervison’ keeps popping into may head, which means we wouldn’t treat him as living in exempt accomodation.

thanks

forgot to say that the organisation (b) is a registered charity and a HA.

That model sounds like exempt accommodation to me: the freehold owner has leased the property to the charity and the charity in turn is subletting or licensing the property, or part of it, to the service user.  The service user’s accommodation is provided to him directly by the charity, which is also the support provider.  It is actually a fairly conventional exempt accommodation model.

The comments about arranging and facilitating come from UT decisions on “shared lives” adult placements where the claimant’s immediate landlord is a private individual and is therefore the wrong kind of landlord for exempt acc. Even though a charity or shire county council has played a part in introducing the claimant to the landlord, it is not exempt acc.

So the project you are describing is, on the face of it, exempt accommodation.

brilliant thanks. Just too much over thinking it these days!