× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Benefits for older people  →  Thread

Becoming mixed age couple and losing HB

 < 1 2

Stainsby
forum member

Welfare rights adviser - Plumstead Community Law Centre

Send message

Total Posts: 613

Joined: 17 June 2010

Charles - 03 February 2020 01:40 PM

No, I’m not aware of any challenges to this.

The argument is basically that the legislation DWP rely upon to terminate HB in these circumstances is here. The relevant section reads:

(2) ... where entitlement under the Housing Benefit SPC Regulations as part of a mixed-age couple begins on or after the appointed day and where the awards are made-
...
(b) at any time, under the Housing Benefit Regulations 2006, to a person who is a member of a mixed-age couple, where the award subsequently ceases to be subject to those Regulations and becomes subject to the Housing Benefit SPC Regulations;

I understand that to mean that the award had to originally have been made to a mixed-age couple, which wasn’t the case here.

In fact, when this Order was made, I thought if anything DWP were relying on a different subparagraph for these cases (Art 6(2)(a)), but it appears not.

I now have a case where my client “aged” into a mixed age couple.  The Council continued to pay on the basis that he no longer received ESA but received state retirement pension.

They now say he has been overpaid and that the overpayment is recoverable.  That is easy to challenge

I would really like to go for a challenge on the entitlement issue, but I am still unsure that the argument will stick

 

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 3196

Joined: 7 January 2016

If you do have a go, please let us know how you get on Derek (and good luck).

CA Adviser
forum member

Citizens Advice Calderdale, West Yorkshire

Send message

Total Posts: 168

Joined: 27 September 2011

Hello, we have a couple where the younger claimant is on ESA. Older claimant reached SRP in January 2021. They receive HB. Older claimant had claimed her SRP in October 2020 but despite this it has not been paid until this week. ESA and HB have continued. ESA has notified them of an O/P of 10 weeks of SRP.
This would appear to be correct under the Regs as the younger partner is on income-related ESA so HB can continue until entitlement to the ESA ends. The ESA award should include a pensioner premium, yes?

Ianb
forum member

Macmillan benefits team, Citizens Advice Bristol

Send message

Total Posts: 958

Joined: 24 November 2017

CA Adviser - 12 May 2021 01:14 PM

..as the younger partner is on income-related ESA so HB can continue until entitlement to the ESA ends. The ESA award should include a pensioner premium, yes?

That would be my interpretation also.

CA Adviser
forum member

Citizens Advice Calderdale, West Yorkshire

Send message

Total Posts: 168

Joined: 27 September 2011

Thanks Ian

AdviserAmy
forum member

Citizens Advice Calderdale

Send message

Total Posts: 4

Joined: 18 February 2019

Cl lives on his own and receives ESA with SDP, PIP DL and HB/CTR. Partner lives elsewhere and is in PT work. She receives PIP DL. She will reach SRP age in September and will receive full new SRP. They want to move in together.
Trying to think it through and would appreciate help.

If they move in together before she reaches SRP age, the HB can continue after SRP age as he is the claimant. He can add her to the ESA claim to give couple SDP, potentially couple carer premia (if he is in receipt of cbESA) and then pensioner premium when she reaches SRP age.

If they move in together after she reaches SRP age, HB would end under the mixed age couple rules. ESA can continue with her added to the claim with a pensioner premium as it is the age of the claimant which is relevant for ESA rather than the age of the partner, no?

They could stay on the ESA without claiming for UC for housing costs.
Or claim UC with LCWRA element for him, and carer element for her plus housing costs element plus couple transitional SDP (assuming she had been added to the ESA claim for a period before claiming to establish entitlement to the couple SDP)?

HB Anorak
forum member

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

Send message

Total Posts: 2895

Joined: 12 March 2013

Even if they move in together after she reaches SPC age they could (subject to amount of pension income) remain on HB.  This is because HB only terminates under Article 6(2)(a) where the award to the couple would be under the HB(SPC) Regs and, if the younger partner remains entitled to ESA(ir), it won’t be.  If there is no income other than SRP and possibly ESA(c), they should still get ESA(ir) and that means they remain on working age HB.

Charles
forum member

Accountant, Haffner Hoff Ltd, Manchester

Send message

Total Posts: 1411

Joined: 27 February 2019

AdviserAmy - 01 June 2021 08:49 AM

If they move in together before she reaches SRP age, the HB can continue after SRP age as he is the claimant. He can add her to the ESA claim to give couple SDP, potentially couple carer premia (if he is in receipt of cbESA) and then pensioner premium when she reaches SRP age.

The HB would continue even if she had been the claimant. The main requirement is that there should be a working-age benefit in place - which there is (the ESA).

If they move in together after she reaches SRP age, HB would end under the mixed age couple rules. ESA can continue with her added to the claim with a pensioner premium as it is the age of the claimant which is relevant for ESA rather than the age of the partner, no?

Not necessarily. The ESA would continue, and therefore the HB claim remains under the working-age rules, and can continue.

They could stay on the ESA without claiming for UC for housing costs.
Or claim UC with LCWRA element for him, and carer element for her plus housing costs element plus couple transitional SDP (assuming she had been added to the ESA claim for a period before claiming to establish entitlement to the couple SDP)?

Might not be so simple to get a Carer Element as well as couple transitional SDP, but it could perhaps be done. This has been discussed on another thread.

EDIT: You got there first this time, Peter!

AdviserAmy
forum member

Citizens Advice Calderdale

Send message

Total Posts: 4

Joined: 18 February 2019

Many thanks to you both for your responses.

chacha
forum member

Benefits dept - Hertsmere Borough Council

Send message

Total Posts: 472

Joined: 13 December 2010

Stainsby - 22 April 2021 04:32 PM
Charles - 03 February 2020 01:40 PM

No, I’m not aware of any challenges to this.

The argument is basically that the legislation DWP rely upon to terminate HB in these circumstances is here. The relevant section reads:

(2) ... where entitlement under the Housing Benefit SPC Regulations as part of a mixed-age couple begins on or after the appointed day and where the awards are made-
...
(b) at any time, under the Housing Benefit Regulations 2006, to a person who is a member of a mixed-age couple, where the award subsequently ceases to be subject to those Regulations and becomes subject to the Housing Benefit SPC Regulations;

I understand that to mean that the award had to originally have been made to a mixed-age couple, which wasn’t the case here.

In fact, when this Order was made, I thought if anything DWP were relying on a different subparagraph for these cases (Art 6(2)(a)), but it appears not.

I now have a case where my client “aged” into a mixed age couple.  The Council continued to pay on the basis that he no longer received ESA but received state retirement pension.

They now say he has been overpaid and that the overpayment is recoverable.  That is easy to challenge

I would really like to go for a challenge on the entitlement issue, but I am still unsure that the argument will stick

Hi Derek, just wondering if you did appeal about the “entitlement” bit or if anyone knows if there is an on-going appeal with this specific issue being the basis of the argument?

Thanks.

Edited: I now have an appeal from my post earlier on in the thread.

Stainsby
forum member

Welfare rights adviser - Plumstead Community Law Centre

Send message

Total Posts: 613

Joined: 17 June 2010

We are still waiting for the LA’s response

I am becoming pessimistic about the entitlement appeal because the 2021 edition of CPAG Benefits and Tax Credits Handbook (Chapter 10)  accepts that HB will end when couples age into becoming a mixed age couple

From CPAG

Your entitlement to HB ends:
•when you become a member of a mixed-age couple. This applies if you were not in a mixed-age couple when you were awarded HB – eg, because you were getting working-age or pension-age HB as a single person; or
•when you reach pension age so you are now a member of a mixed-age couple, if you were getting working-age HB while you and your partner were both under pension age; or
•if you are pension age, are a member of a mixed-age couple and are getting working-age HB because you (or your partner) are on IS, income-based JSA, income-related ESA or UC, when entitlement to that benefit ends.
Your HB entitlement ends on the date the change takes effect under under the HB rules (see here).
Note: your entitlement to HB does not end, even if you are a member of a mixed-age couple, if:
•the HB is for ‘specified accommodation’ or ‘temporary accommodation’ (see here for what counts); or
•you are not yet pension age, are getting working-age HB and are on IS, income-based JSA or income-related ESA when your partner reaches pension age; or
•you are at least pension age and are prevented from claiming UC for one of the reasons on here and, in addition, you cannot qualify for PC or pension-age HB because you are a member of a mixed-age couple. In this case, you are treated as not yet pension age so your award of working-age HB can continue. If you are also getting IS, income-based JSA or income-related ESA, your entitlement to that benefit can also continue under this rule

Charles
forum member

Accountant, Haffner Hoff Ltd, Manchester

Send message

Total Posts: 1411

Joined: 27 February 2019

I think it is pretty much accepted that that is what the government intended, and that that is how LAs are behaving in practice. Question is only if the legislation backs that up.

In a way, it is similar to the case about reclaiming tax credits when there had been entitlement the previous tax year. There too, the legislation hasn’t been drafted in a way which backs up the government’s (alleged) intentions and how claims are decided in practice.

chacha
forum member

Benefits dept - Hertsmere Borough Council

Send message

Total Posts: 472

Joined: 13 December 2010

Thanks for your responses.