× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Benefits for older people  →  Thread

Mixed age couple and housing benefit from 15th May

 < 1 2 3 4 > 

Ianb
forum member

Macmillan benefits team, Citizens Advice Bristol

Send message

Total Posts: 958

Joined: 24 November 2017

Thanks to all who have posted.

Ianb
forum member

Macmillan benefits team, Citizens Advice Bristol

Send message

Total Posts: 958

Joined: 24 November 2017

Received this from someone who cannot post here:

I emailed DWP asking about this, and they’ve now replied that such HB claims WILL end (unless they misunderstood the question!).

This is what I wrote:

“Is the intention of art. 6(2) to end housing benefit claims when the elder partner of a couple who are receiving working-age HB reaches pension-age, and they therefore become a mixed-age couple? At that point, ordinarily, the claim would convert to a pension-age HB award, so could possibly be included in art. 6(2)(a).”

They replied:

“The notes at the end of the Commencement Order explain the purpose of Article 6 as follows:

“Article 6 provides for termination of awards of housing benefit made to a person who has become a member of a mixed-age couple, awards made to a mixed-age couple where the award becomes subject to the Housing Benefit (Persons who have attained the qualifying age for state pension credit) Regulations 2006 (S.I. 2006/214), and advance awards made to a member of a mixed-age couple before the making of this Order. Awards must terminate where entitlement to housing benefit for those of state pension credit qualifying age, as part of a mixed-age couple, would otherwise have begun on or after the appointed day.”

As the Housing Benefit Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/213) don’t apply to couples where one member has reached the qualifying age for pension credit, then article 6 does also end the existing Housing Benefit claim if the claimant is part of a mixed age couple. If income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance, income-related Employment and Support Allowance, Income Support or Universal Credit are in payment then Housing Benefit under SI 2006/213 continues in payment until both members reach the qualifying age for Pension Credit.”

HB Anorak
forum member

Benefits consultant/trainer - hbanorak.co.uk, East London

Send message

Total Posts: 2895

Joined: 12 March 2013

I don’t think DWP did understand the question, as our acquaintance CE suspected.

The question was about Article 6(2)(a): does an HB claimant become a member of a mixed age couple because either s/he or his/her partner reaches SPC age, when they were already a couple but just not a mixed age one?  Or is Article 6(2)(a) only triggered when two people who were not previously a couple become a couple, and that newly formed couple is a mixed age one?

But DWP’s answer seems to be more relevant to Article 6(2)(b), which says that HB terminates when an HB award becomes subject to the SPC-age HB Regs.  The crucial point that DWP has overlooked there is that Article 6(2)(b) only applies where the HB award immediately beforehand was to a mixed age couple under the working age HB Regs.  Up to now that has been quite unusual: the working age HB regs only apply to mixed age couples where they are getting a working age DWP benefit and have for some reason not made the no-brainer switch to SPC as soon as they got the chance.  In the future they will not be able to make that switch and so you will probably see more couples in that situation:

Before: working age couple on DWP benefit.  One of them reaches SPC age: switch to SPC
After: working age couple on DWP benefit.  One of them reaches SPC age and then
- if the younger member of the couple was the DWP claimant, stay on legacy DWP benefit and HB for as long as circumstances support that.  If DWP benefit ends, HB terminates under Article 6(2)(b)*
- if the older member of the couple was the DWP claimant, the DWP benefit will end and HB will terminate under Article 6(2)(b)*
- in neither case will a new SPC claim be possible to replace the working age DWP benefit.  The choice will be: claim UC, or don’t claim UC and make do with state pension.  For most renters that probably won’t be enough and they will claim UC.

*Or will it?  Another point picked up on by CE is that the wording of Article 6 arguably requires the mixed age couple on working age DWP benefit to have already been a mixed age couple when their HB award was first made.  If they were already on HB as a working age couple before they became a mixed age couple on DWP working age benefits, Article 6(2)(b) does not apply because Article 6(2) applies where HB “awards are made” (present tense) to people satisfying the descriptions in subparas (2)(a) to (c).  If he is right about that, HB would not terminate in the examples above and the couples would have a further option of remaining on HB and state pension without claiming UC - which would normally be the better option because of the income taper and higher applicable amount.  But that also depends on the answer to his original question - the one that DWP didn’t answer - about whether such people have “become a member of a mixed age couple” simply by reaching SPC age.

Ianb
forum member

Macmillan benefits team, Citizens Advice Bristol

Send message

Total Posts: 958

Joined: 24 November 2017

My head hurts.

Jon Blackwell
forum member

Programmer - Lisson Grove Benefits Program, Brighton

Send message

Total Posts: 501

Joined: 18 June 2010

DMG memo 1/19 appeared today…

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/779701/dmg1-19.pdf

... it doesn’t really help with the interpretation of article 6.

In particular, it doesn’t answer the question of whether couples who simply ‘age into’ mixed-age status are meant to be caught by 6(2)(a). 

However, the only example the give a couple becoming mixed-age is where a new partnership is formed (para 8) - so that might possibly be a clue.

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 3196

Joined: 7 January 2016

Jon Blackwell - 20 February 2019 02:40 PM

DMG memo 1/19 appeared today…

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/779701/dmg1-19.pdf

... it doesn’t really help with the interpretation of article 6.

In particular, it doesn’t answer the question of whether couples who simply ‘age into’ mixed-age status are meant to be caught by 6(2)(a). 

However, the only example the give a couple becoming mixed-age is where a new partnership is formed (para 8) - so that might possibly be a clue.

Yes, I saw this Jon, it’s very unsatisfactory in what it doesn’t cover.

Charles
forum member

Accountant, Haffner Hoff Ltd, Manchester

Send message

Total Posts: 1411

Joined: 27 February 2019

I emailed DWP again asking for explicit confirmation on this point.

I wrote:

A couple, both working-age, receive HB and (say) tax credits, but are not on an out-of-work benefit.
Is it correct to say that the day the elder member of the couple becomes a pensioner, the HB claim will end, and they will be forced to claim UC?

They replied:

Yes, that is correct. Until both members of the couple have reached pension age they must claim UC.

Make of that what you will!

Peter Turville
forum member

Welfare rights worker - Oxford Community Work Agency

Send message

Total Posts: 1659

Joined: 18 June 2010

At least one HB authority (Oxford City) appears to be jumping the gun and refusing to accept new claims for HB from ‘mixed age’ couples.

Tying to get to the bottom of what they are doing, why & on what legal basis.

[ Edited: 21 Mar 2019 at 12:44 pm by Peter Turville ]
HB Anorak
forum member

Benefits consultant/trainer - hbanorak.co.uk, East London

Send message

Total Posts: 2895

Joined: 12 March 2013

Claimant has to be Rod, not Penny since January - was the claim rejected for that reason?

The law is Article 5 of the No 31 Order (SI 2019/37) and the amendment that it makes to Article 7 of the No 23 Order.

Peter Turville
forum member

Welfare rights worker - Oxford Community Work Agency

Send message

Total Posts: 1659

Joined: 18 June 2010

HB Anorak - 21 March 2019 12:50 PM

Claimant has to be Rod, not Penny since January - was the claim rejected for that reason?

The law is Article 5 of the No 31 Order (SI 2019/37) and the amendment that it makes to Article 7 of the No 23 Order.

Rod not Penny? I’m assuming this is an example in a HB or PC guidance circular / memo but can’t identify which one.

By Rod I’m assuming this is the person over SPC age and therefore the claimant for PC & HB.

I have a specific case where a mixed age couple of which the SPC age member was previously in receipt of PC & HB(SPC) were wrongly advised to claim UC when they became responsible for a child. They have withdrawn their UC claim (confirmed) post the 15/1 changes to PC for child additions but are currently being refused PC and HB - for reason yet to be fully established. But other local agencies are reporting problems with mixed age couples being told by HB they cannot make a new claim for HB - again still trying to establish full circumstances / reasons.

HB Anorak
forum member

Benefits consultant/trainer - hbanorak.co.uk, East London

Send message

Total Posts: 2895

Joined: 12 March 2013

Rod not Penny? I’m assuming this is an example in a HB or PC guidance circular / memo but can’t identify which one.

Stewart - a popular singer who I understand has enjoyed considerable success in the hit parade, your honour

By Rod I’m assuming this is the person over SPC age and therefore the claimant for PC & HB

.
Yes, by 27 years

Maybe the Council is one of those still under the (wrong) impression that once you have had contact with UC it is impossible to go back to legacy benefits.

Peter Turville
forum member

Welfare rights worker - Oxford Community Work Agency

Send message

Total Posts: 1659

Joined: 18 June 2010

HB Anorak - 21 March 2019 01:55 PM

Stewart - a popular singer who I understand has enjoyed considerable success in the hit parade, your honour

Ah! I remember now when Maggie May was a popular hit - at the time I was misspending my youth at the Roundhouse or Rainbow listening to rather more progressive (or loud) tunes!

My clients can top 27 yrs!

[ Edited: 21 Mar 2019 at 03:58 pm by shawn mach ]
HB Anorak
forum member

Benefits consultant/trainer - hbanorak.co.uk, East London

Send message

Total Posts: 2895

Joined: 12 March 2013

My clients can top 27 yrs!

Surely you don’t mean it’s Ronnie Wood!

Peter Turville
forum member

Welfare rights worker - Oxford Community Work Agency

Send message

Total Posts: 1659

Joined: 18 June 2010

HB Anorak - 21 March 2019 02:40 PM

My clients can top 27 yrs!

Surely you don’t mean it’s Ronnie Wood!

Client doesn’t have the appearance of someone who spent to much time in Itchycoo Park.

Peter Turville
forum member

Welfare rights worker - Oxford Community Work Agency

Send message

Total Posts: 1659

Joined: 18 June 2010

HB Anorak - 21 March 2019 01:55 PM

Maybe the Council is one of those still under the (wrong) impression that once you have had contact with UC it is impossible to go back to legacy benefits.

Peter - am I understanding the application of Art 5 of the No 31 Order correctly?

If the potential claimant for HB(SPC) is already of SPC age and is not currently receiving / entitled to UC and today makes a new claim for HB & PC (no question of them being claims in advance) the amendments made by the no 31 Order do not currently prevent an award of HB (or PC) being made.

Or, as the person is not currently in receipt of HB and/or PC Art 5 (2)(a)(i) prevents a new claim for HB/PC because Art 5(1) of No 31 Order means the exclusion from claiming HB/PC come into effect from 15/1/19 (not 15/5/19)?

These are a ‘mixed age’ couple who were wrongly refused CTC and advised to claim UC when they became responsible for a child in Feb. last year and have now withdrawn their claim for UC (which has ended).