UC claim following wrong advice from LA. Nil award and loss of CTR

Client (over pension age) in receipt of state pension and occupational pensions. No PC (due to income); Partner (under pension age), in receipt of NS-ESA (Support group). They were in receipt of Council Tax reduction (as over pension age), but not HB.  Moved accommodation within the same LA.  Client asked the local authority for help towards the rent and was advised to claim UC.  Claim made, however, due to their income they are not entitled to any UC: Nil award.  Their CTR has now dropped (about 75%) because of the UC claim as they are now treated as working-age couple.  Apart from lodging a complaint to the local authority for the mis-advice, is there anything else they can do? Is there an exception to close/reverse the UC claim as they have a nil award and return to being assessed as pension age couple for council tax reduction purposes (I’m trying to be optimistic!)

I’m a bit confused about where the incorrect advice is here.

As a mixed-age couple, they cant’ claim HB until they both reach pension age so the LA were correct that there only option was look to claim UC instead. And on the CTR, I think they did change the rules so that the working age rules apply and not the default scheme for MAC’s as well.

Hi Paul, thanks for replying.  The wrong advice is that because of their income, they are not entitled to the HCE of UC. A simple calculation would have shown that.  If they hadn’t applied to UC, they could have continued with their CTR as pension age.  Now, their CTR has been recalculated because the Client claimed UC, prompting the council to treat their claim as a working age claim, rather than pension age.

But isn’t the change of address a change of circumstances that needs to be reported for CTS as well Toya? I’ll be honest and say I’m not 100% certain on this from reading my CPAG CT handbook but I would assume that a change of address would be something that should be notified in case of a different banding.

Good point!  I’ll check that!
Although the CTR changed with the UC claim (and changed the calculation from pensioner to working-age)...not from the date they moved.

I’ve gone back and searched RIghtsnet news and I can’t find anything confirming the default scheme regulations were changed to mirror the MAC changes for PC and HB in May 2019.

What I did find was this, which appears to suggest that the proposed changes weren’t made MHCLG confirms it will not be amending CTR prescribed requirements regulations to take into account changes relating to mixed age couples claiming means-tested benefits

Might it be an idea to challenge the decision that says the working-age CTR regs apply and see what they say perhaps?

Thank you, Paul.  I’ll look into that 😊

My reading is that the working-age CTR regs apply if you are in a MAC and you are being paid UC - if your clients were never paid but simply made a claim which was refused, I think they should stay on the pension-age scheme.

Meaning of “pensioner” and “person who is not a pensioner”
3.  In these Regulations a person is—

(a)a “pensioner” if—
(i)he has attained the qualifying age for state pension credit; and
(ii)he is not, or, if he has a partner, his partner is not—
(aa)a person on income support, on an income-based jobseeker’s allowance or on an income-related employment and support allowance; or
(bb)a person with an award of universal credit; and
(b)a “person who is not a pensioner” if—
(i)he has not attained the qualifying age for state pension credit; or
(ii)he has attained the qualifying age for state pension credit and he, or if he has a partner, his partner, is—
(aa)a person on income support, on income-based jobseeker’s allowance or an income-related employment and support allowance; or
(bb)a person with an award of universal credit.

The Council Tax Reduction Schemes (Prescribed Requirements) (England) Regulations 2012 - however, annoyingly these haven’t been consolidated with later amendments but I can’t see anything in any amending regs to change this and the 2021 CPAG CT handbook says same thing.

There was no award of UC so they are still a pensioner for the meaning of CTR schemes and should be therefore assessed under the more generous default scheme.

I agree with Paul, if the CTR applicant is a pensioner and there are no working age DWP benefits in payment (including UC), the CTR award falls under the CTR rules for pensioners.

I think it’s a working age case if the CTR applicant is the younger partner, which is different from both HB and the old CTB scheme; but there is nothing to prevent them from doing a switcheroo if necessary and getting the older partner into the applicant role.

Thanks Peter, I really dislike CT questions, so reassuring to know I got there in the end :-)

HB Anorak - 12 October 2022 03:54 PM

I agree with Paul, if the CTR applicant is a pensioner and there are no working age DWP benefits in payment (including UC), the CTR award falls under the CTR rules for pensioners.

Thank you both.  Although there are no working age benefits in payment (apart from NS-ESA for the partner, which should be disregarded), there’s a UC claim (prompted by the LA)- with a Nil award - therefore no payment…and the LA re-calculated the CTR (from pensioner to working age couple) when the UC claim was made.  Will challenge….

Toya - 12 October 2022 03:00 PM

Client (over pension age) in receipt of state pension and occupational pensions. No PC (due to income); Partner (under pension age), in receipt of NS-ESA (Support group). They were in receipt of Council Tax reduction (as over pension age), but not HB.  Moved accommodation within the same LA.  Client asked the local authority for help towards the rent and was advised to claim UC.  Claim made, however, due to their income they are not entitled to any UC: Nil award.  Their CTR has now dropped (about 75%) because of the UC claim as they are now treated as working-age couple.  Apart from lodging a complaint to the local authority for the mis-advice, is there anything else they can do? Is there an exception to close/reverse the UC claim as they have a nil award and return to being assessed as pension age couple for council tax reduction purposes (I’m trying to be optimistic!)

I had a similair case where the local authority said the couple were ‘in receipt’ of UC, even though a nil award, as claim was still open. So they couple then requested the UC claim to be closed as they were getting less Ctax support. We then asked UC to change the termination date to the period in which they first had a nil award. After several months and many calls to UC, this has now been done and instead of the couple owing council tax they are now in credit.
hope this helps