× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Housing costs  →  Thread

HA tenancy for a Minor - can Guarantor get UCHE? 

Prisca
forum member

benefits section (training & accuracy) Bristol city council

Send message

Total Posts: 202

Joined: 20 August 2015

Hi

a customer is on UC at her family home where she lives with her partner and kids – no UCHE,

Her grandaughter’s dad died, and the grandaughter has been assigned the dads HA tenancy – the grandaughter is 13
My customer is the gurantor ( its an ffical form – form of guaantee – for use with Agreement for tenancy for a minor)

Grandaughter is too young to get UC – can my customer claim housing costs for this address? Would she need to make her own individual claim and be living at the address as her perm residence? she says she and grandaughter split their time, staying most evenings at the HA place and going to her family home after school/work .

I know we would have considered HB in these cases but I’m not sure about UC.
Thanks

Elliot Kent
forum member

Shelter

Send message

Total Posts: 3139

Joined: 14 July 2014

Where the liability for rent rests with a child for whom the claimant is responsible, then it can be included in the award as though it were the claimant’s liability - see para 1, sch 2 UC Regs.

However the issue here isn’t really about liability, its about residence. It seems far from clear that anybody is living in the property as their main residence and that would seem to be the problem with their claim.

Prisca
forum member

benefits section (training & accuracy) Bristol city council

Send message

Total Posts: 202

Joined: 20 August 2015

the HA place is a one bed, the family home is a 2 bed - and the customer has 4 kids plus the grandaughtr, so think thats why they are splitting the time as neither property big enough to accommodate everyone. 

Thanks for the info , really useful

Stainsby
forum member

Welfare rights adviser - Plumstead Community Law Centre

Send message

Total Posts: 618

Joined: 17 June 2010

It may be arguable   following Secretary of State v Miah [2003] EWCA Civ 1111 (Reported as R(JSA)9/03 ) CH/1895/2008 Hackney LB v GA [2008] UKUT 26 (AAC)  (Reported as R(H)5/09) and Birmingham CC v IB [2009] UKUT 116 (AAC) that the dwelling occupied by the claimant comprises both properties

Mia was concerned with disregarded capital ( the value of the dwelling occupied as the home being disregarded)

Judge Jacobs held in [2008] UKUT 26 that although Miah was not binding in the context of the case before him, there was nothing in the structure of the HB legislation that precluded ” dwelling” from having the meaning ascribed to it in Miah.

In IB Judge Mark reached the same conclusions as Judge Jacobs   in R(H)5/09

The UC Regs use the word “acommodation ” rather than “dwelling”.  “Acommodation” is not defined, but I cannnot find any reason to suppose that in this context “accommodation” isn’t synonymous with “dwelling”

[ Edited: 4 May 2023 at 07:28 pm by Stainsby ]

File Attachments