Forum Home → Discussion → Universal credit administration → Thread
Does DWP gather information relevant to whether claimant qualifies for additional bedroom on UC housing costs element?
Hi All,
I have put this here rather than in the Housing Costs section as it is more an administrative question.
I am trying to work out how (or if) DWP gather information necessary to know whether a claimant qualifies for an extra bedroom under para 12 of Sch 4 to UC Regs (overnight care, disabled child cannot share etc)?
On the case I have seen then nothing in the question on the initial electronic claim form or when moving address and declaring change of circs would elicit that information.
It has been suggested that it might be done via asking a “To Do” task which has some extra questions- but not seen evidence this was done here (and don’t know whether that To Do, if it exists, would be auto generated or not). Perhaps a To Do of that nature would be triggered if claimant or a child in the household had DLA or PIP?
Anyway, obviously worrying if DWP are leaving it up to a claimant to raise the issue off their own back when either subjected to bedroom tax or alternatively when LHA calculated is less than the rent (both situations where claimant might benefit from an additional bedroom being allowed in the calculation.
Please let me know if you have seen a case where DWP proactively sought information which would allow them to see if an additional bedroom could be included in the HCE. Would really help to know what questions they asked and at what stage.
Thanks,
Martin
I don’t know. I do know that the Valuation Office Agency bedroom calculator on their website (https://lha-direct.voa.gov.uk/secure/bedroomcalculator.aspx) is outrageously inaccurate. I made, another, formal complaint about it to them yesterday. It takes no account of any of the carer, forces, disability, etc. factors around bedroom entitlement. We have a free calculator that tries to take those into account at https://www.ferret.co.uk/reckoners/demo/bdrooms/english/Bedrooms%20Web.htm ( https://www.ferret.co.uk/reckoners/demo/bdrooms/cymraeg/Bedrooms%20Web%20Cymraeg.htm in Welsh)
Hi Martin
I have had 2 recent cases, one dep child got MRC DLA, another husband got PIP EDLC. UC applied extra bedroom in each case without claimants asking and in each case UC did not ask for further evidence. Unbelievable I know!
Thanks barbs1000 - was just wondering whether you had to raise it with them first or whether they proactively asked “do you have an overnight carer” etc?
If I personally assist with submission of a new UC application and there is a “spare” bedroom situation, and client seems to satisfy the necessary criteria for additional bedroom, I do not wait for UC to ask and explore the issue themselves- I address it up front. I draft something for clients to put in a Journal and told them to prep evidence.
I learned to do that proactively from my other group of clients; those who submitted claims themselves, had a “spare” bedroom, may have even discussed health conditions with work coach- and were never offered additional bedroom. Over last 3 years I have never encounter DWP exploring or deciding on this without formal request. And all I do is UC.
I find there are certain niche subject which are so notoriously missed by UC staff that I have template letters: additional bedroom, primary carer of EEA child in ed, refer for “health journey on day 29” etc etc.
Thanks barbs1000 - was just wondering whether you had to raise it with them first or whether they proactively asked “do you have an overnight carer” etc?
I presume those cases involved not sharing a bedroom, in which case it makes sense the UC computer system can give the extra bedroom automatically, as it is given even without needing an overnight carer.
Not to do with overnight carer - but I have had at least 2 clients who qualify for one room rate instead of shared room rate because they are in receipt of PIP. (And they’re under 35.) This has been missed by UC and we have had to raise it after the decision has been made on the claim. As far as I’m aware the UC form doesn’t ask about PIP, let alone the other issues that may flow from that.
Thanks barbs1000 - was just wondering whether you had to raise it with them first or whether they proactively asked “do you have an overnight carer” etc?
I presume those cases involved not sharing a bedroom, in which case it makes sense the UC computer system can give the extra bedroom automatically, as it is given even without needing an overnight carer.
It still wouldn’t make sense as UC wouldn’t have any basis for assuming that the couple can’t share a bedroom even on their own account (before even starting to think about things like doctor’s letters to support the medical need).
Come to think of it, I do think I have seen cases like Barb’s in the past, where a couple would have a letter on their UC account stating that they would get an extra bedroom despite their being no obvious paper trail of them having requested it. Whilst these things raise an eyebrow, I haven’t really looked into it further as it hasn’t ever been related to the advice enquiry.
I think that the answer to Martin’s general question is that aside from these outlier situations which are hard to explain, there isn’t much if any proactive investigation into additional bedroom entitlements.
A similar issue which we were looking at recently was the exemptions to the shared accommodation rate of LHA. We had suggested that it might be appropriate to create some sort of “to do” which would allow claimants to identify if they might be exempt (e.g. by asking if they had spent time in homeless hostels) but I gather that this didn’t come to much.
(We also regularly get cases like Helen’s, where shared accommodation rate is still in place despite the claimant getting PIP.)
Thanks all.
I think if Elliott is right and DWP do not ask questions to determine whether an additional bedroom is possible then in cases where that matters the claimant would have very good grounds for official error revision- SSWP has not sought information to know if relevant rule applies.
More generally, again if Elliott is right, it is terrible that several years after the bedroom tax cases and being forced to legislate so as not to carry on discriminating, the SSWP has now designed her operations so that they systematically do not seek necessary information to know whether they are in fact discriminating and carry on regardless.
Just got a case with a severely disabled young person (18 yr old) in a privately rented 3 bed house since early 2021, with two to one care provision day and night. It sounds like a massive care package.
It seems from the info from the appointee, that the single room rate has been paid, but no additional room rate for the carer(s).
He says the 3 bedrooms are essential as there are always 3 individuals in the property.
I am just about to ask what was his experience when the UC claim was made. But I also need to advise him on his next course of action. Would he have grounds to seek an official error revision if the room rate question was never asked?
(I’ll obviously look at DHP, too, but need to make sure they’ve achieved as much as possible from correct awards first)
Any suggestions would be most appreciated. I’ve never come across a case like this before.
Thanks everyone
Elaine
Just got a case with a severely disabled young person (18 yr old) in a privately rented 3 bed house since early 2021, with two to one care provision day and night. It sounds like a massive care package.
It seems from the info from the appointee, that the single room rate has been paid, but no additional room rate for the carer(s).
He says the 3 bedrooms are essential as there are always 3 individuals in the property.
I am just about to ask what was his experience when the UC claim was made. But I also need to advise him on his next course of action. Would he have grounds to seek an official error revision if the room rate question was never asked?(I’ll obviously look at DHP, too, but need to make sure they’ve achieved as much as possible from correct awards first)
Any suggestions would be most appreciated. I’ve never come across a case like this before.
Thanks everyone
Elaine
If she is in receipt of PIP daily living, she should get the one bed rate - not the shared accommodation rate and another room for regular overnight carer so this needs to be flagged up to UC
[ Edited: 25 Feb 2022 at 11:32 am by Vonny ]Would he have grounds to seek an official error revision if the room rate question was never asked?
It is unlikely to be necessary in this case. If the claimant moved into the property in early 2021, then he is probably still in time to make a (late) request for “any grounds” revision (i.e. mandatory reconsideration). He has 13 months from the date of the challenged decision which is likely the first award notice in which the HCE was included. If the DWP refuse that request whether substantively or because its late, he can appeal to the FtT.
However if he is past the long stop deadline, then yes it would be arguable that a failure to ask relevant questions about additional bedrooms constituted official error and opens the door to an “any time” revision request. There is authority on the circumstances in which a failure to ask questions may constitute official error in MB v Christchurch BC (HB) [2014] AACR 39.
(Note that even if he has two overnight carers, the regs only allow for one additional bedroom.)
Would he have grounds to seek an official error revision if the room rate question was never asked?
It is unlikely to be necessary in this case. If the claimant moved into the property in early 2021, then he is probably still in time to make a (late) request for “any grounds” revision (i.e. mandatory reconsideration). He has 13 months from the date of the challenged decision which is likely the first award notice in which the HCE was included. If the DWP refuse that request whether substantively or because its late, he can appeal to the FtT.
However if he is past the long stop deadline, then yes it would be arguable that a failure to ask relevant questions about additional bedrooms constituted official error and opens the door to an “any time” revision request. There is authority on the circumstances in which a failure to ask questions may constitute official error in MB v Christchurch BC (HB) [2014] AACR 39.
(Note that even if he has two overnight carers, the regs only allow for one additional bedroom.)
Many thanks. Will check with appointee for detailed dates for the MR. (I’d already warned him about the regs for just one additional room, but I think he’ll be pleased with Any kind of increase in financial support. Clearly financially challenging circumstances).
This is is linked to the oeriginal question but I would be interested to know what research is available about finance to suspended UC claims - what limitations are there on there on the giver ; does the recipient receive monies from non legitimate sources?
It all stems from the rightsnet story re the remaining 168000 susepended UC claim issued on the 2/3/22