UC and on remand

Hi all,

I have a difficult one. I have a tenant who was on UC, he was held on remand in July 2017 with a trial date in November 2017. This was a hung jury so remained on remand until his retrial in February 2018 and was then released without charge.

Due to the 6 month absence ruling, his UC claim was cancelled.

As claims for UC are suspended until 30th May 2018, I have applied for HB and a DHP as he now has £4500 rent arrears. HB has been agreed, but Medway Council are querying the DHP saying that UC should have paid 6 months?

They say that because the tenant was not expected to be on remand for longer than 6 months, that UC should have paid for 6 months then cancelled the claim. I have argued this and told them that UC held the claim until he was released, which was longer than 6 months so therefore will not pay.

Medway council are now telling me I should appeal the decision under The Universal Credit Regulations 2013, Regulation 19.

I have read through the regulation and it is a very grey area.

I have asked another member on here directly and this is her response:-

Hi Karen - looking at reg 19 it does look like he should have got housing costs for the first six months as he had not been sentenced and had been getting housing costs immediately before so I do think it is worth doing a late MR/appeal of the decision to stop his UC if it was before the six months were up. (You didn’t say when the claim was cancelled - if it was after he had been absent six months then I think that is correct)

But just my interpretation - you could stick it in the forum too - there are a lot of experts out there smile

Can anyone else clarify this for me.

Just to add, the claim for UC was cancelled in January 2018 as he received 2 payments that covered June/July 2017.

Reg 19 operates to allow payment of housing costs only for a maximum of six months of being a prisoner.

For reg 19 to apply your client must (a) have been in receipt of UC with housing costs immediately before his imprisonment (which he was) and (b) not have been sentenced to a term of custody likely to exceed six months (which he wasn’t as he was never sentenced to anything at all).

So yes, he was entitled to housing costs for the first six months of imprisonment. I don’t think there is any sort of “grey area” here.

Hi Karen
The Universal Credit Regulations 2013, Regulation 19.

If a person is in prison on remand, and was in receipt of the housing element prior to incarceration, it continues for 6 mths and should be paid within this timeframe. It ceases after this timeframe.  As your client was initially on remand their HE of UC should have been paid. it should not have been “that UC held the claim until he was released”.

I work inside an HMP weekly and since the introduction of UC for some clients this has become something of a pain. UC-HE is paid for 6 mths if on remand and being paid prior to incarceration. 

Hope this helps.

19.—(1) Entitlement to universal credit does not arise where a person is—
(a) a member of a religious order who is fully maintained by their order;
(b) a prisoner; or
(c)serving a sentence of imprisonment detained in hospital.

(2) Paragraph (1)(b) does not apply during the first 6 months when the person is a prisoner where—
(a) the person was entitled to universal credit [F1as a single person] immediately before becoming a prisoner, and the calculation of their award included an amount for the housing costs element; and
(b) the person has not been sentenced to a term in custody that is expected to extend beyond that 6 months.
(3) In the case of a prisoner to whom paragraph (2) applies, an award of universal credit is not to include any element other than the housing costs element.

Great, thank you.

Looks like I will be doing an appeal to UC on this then.

Regards
Karen