× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Housing costs  →  Thread

4 week run on v 2 week extended payment

Mairi
forum member

Welfare rights officer - Dunedin Canmore Housing Association

Send message

Total Posts: 271

Joined: 25 June 2010

I’m working with a tenant who claimed UC when they moved local authority areas, having previously been in receipt of HB at their previous address.  At the time of the move they had a notice period at their previous address which they couldn’t avoid.

I’m looking for views on whether people think that the tenant should have been awarded the 2 week payment of housing benefit allowed following a universal credit application or whether they should have been paid the period of the notice, which was longer.

My belief is that they should be awarded whichever is more beneficial to them but of course the local authority involved don’t agree.  I’ve not found any information which states clearly either way.

HB Anorak
forum member

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

Send message

Total Posts: 2895

Joined: 12 March 2013

Just the two weeks unfortunately (assuming it isn’t temporary or supported accommodation).

Reg 5 of the UC (Transitional Provisions) Regs 2014 says you cannot be entitled to HB if you are also entitled to UC, except where:

- the HB is for temp/supported, or
- the two week run on applies

And Reg 8 says that HB terminates after two weeks when UC is claimed.  That’s pretty clear - not four weeks, two.  The four week notice period is just normal HB and so it is affected by Regs 5 and 8 cited above in the same way as if the person claims UC without moving address.

Va1der
forum member

Welfare Rights Officer with SWAMP Glasgow

Send message

Total Posts: 706

Joined: 7 May 2019

How does this work with HB regs 7(6)(d)?

(6)Where a person is liable to make payments in respect of two (but not more than two) dwellings, he shall be treated as occupying both dwellings as his home only—
          (d) in the case where a person has moved into a new dwelling occupied as the home, except where paragraph (4) applies, for a period not exceeding 4 benefit weeks if he could not reasonably have avoided liability in respect of two dwellings;

Under that provision HB can continue to be paid for the old property for up to 4 weeks. I assume the UC claim would send a stop notice to the old LA as usual, but that creates a gap - is it just another issue with UC?

alang
forum member

Paisley South HA

Send message

Total Posts: 54

Joined: 9 February 2015

It’s just another issue with UC, I’m afraid. As per the regs HB Anorak has cited, no HB (including HB on 2 homes and Extended Payment when starting work) can be paid following the claim for UC being made. This basically closes off the HB Regs that Va1der has cited to the claimant. Assuming that the SSWP is satisfied that 4(1)(a) to (d) WRA 2012 are satisfied.

Mairi
forum member

Welfare rights officer - Dunedin Canmore Housing Association

Send message

Total Posts: 271

Joined: 25 June 2010

Thanks all.  A shame for lots of people I work with who have no option but to claim UC when their only change of circumstances is a new house in a different local authority area.

HB Anorak
forum member

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

Send message

Total Posts: 2895

Joined: 12 March 2013

The only thing the claimant has any control over in these cases is when to claim UC.  Depending on the rate of the housing element at the new address versus HB received at the old address, it might be worth sacrificing some UC in order to prolong the HB award.  The longest you could leave it would be up until the date before the notice period runs out, then claim UC, get another fortnight of HB and use it to clear some of the arrears on the new tenancy. HB will continue for two weeks under Reg 8 even if it would otherwise have stopped sooner: Reg 8 has the effect of prolonging entitlement to HB in some circumstances.

Julie HC
forum member

Specialist Benefits Team, Stoke and North Staffs CAB

Send message

Total Posts: 24

Joined: 26 March 2019

I’m appealing a HB decision not to award HB for a notice period for supported housing where claimant was on UC and moved out and claimed UC Housing Costs. Can the HB be extended 4 weeks in this case?

HB Anorak
forum member

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

Send message

Total Posts: 2895

Joined: 12 March 2013

Julie HC - 28 February 2020 01:57 PM

I’m appealing a HB decision not to award HB for a notice period for supported housing where claimant was on UC and moved out and claimed UC Housing Costs. Can the HB be extended 4 weeks in this case?

Yes: this is a different situation.  One of the exceptions to Reg 5 applies here: the HB being paid alongside UC is in respect of specified accommodation.

However, there are two-counter-arguments, one misconceived and one worthy of serious consideration.

The misconceived argument is that UC has no provision for covering unavoidable overlap between tenancies.  To which I say: so what?  This is HB, which does have such provision. Thank you, next.

More serious argument: all forms of specified accommodation require the claimant to be receiving support in the accommodation,  If the claimant has moved out, s/he is no longer receiving support and so it isn’t specified accommodation any longer, therefore Reg 5 kicks in to zap the HB.  I can at least respect that argument, although it doesn’t convince me.  The claimant is treated as occupying the dwelling for up to four weeks’ unavoidable notice period - what we call a “deeming fiction”.  The fiction is that the claimant still occupies the dwelling, and it is to be taken as far as necessary to achieve its legislative purpose.  The purpose of this particular deeming fiction is to ensure that HB covers an unavoidable notice period and in order to achieve that we have to pretend that the claimant continues to occupy the dwelling in the same way - if they really were in occupation they would still be receiving support, so their fictional occupation must include fictional support - otherwise the policy intention of Reg 7(6)(d) is frustrated.

I wouldn’t proactively raise that second counter-argument - just be prepared to take it on if the Council raises it.  If all the Council has got is “UC won’t cover two homes”, you’re home and dry.

For a bonus point: guess what the official DWP position on these cases is?

 

[ Edited: 28 Feb 2020 at 02:33 pm by HB Anorak ]
Julie HC
forum member

Specialist Benefits Team, Stoke and North Staffs CAB

Send message

Total Posts: 24

Joined: 26 March 2019

Council are arguing that “Circular HB A19/2013 paragraphs 15-17 details the rules that should be applied when a tenant whose income is Universal Credit moves out of Supported Accommodation, this is also covered in The Universal Credit (Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2014.  These both confirm that a tenant can only receive Housing Benefit while they live in supported accommodation, and Housing Benefit cannot be awarded because of unavoidable overlapping liability after they have moved out.”  We are arguing that this is fundamentally wrong as there is provision under HB rules as you say to treat a person as living in the accommodation if there was an unavoidable reason for an overlap with another tenancy, even if the person has had to claim UC Housing costs for the 2nd tenancy.

[ Edited: 28 Feb 2020 at 04:18 pm by Julie HC ]
HB Anorak
forum member

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

Send message

Total Posts: 2895

Joined: 12 March 2013

Ah well, they’ll learn the hard way.  Circulars aren’t the law, but actually the Circular doesn’t even say that.  This is para 17:

A person receiving Universal Credit who moves out of “exempt accommodation” will have a housing costs element included in their Universal Credit from the beginning of the monthly assessment period in which they move. Their HB will cease from when they move out of the accommodation in the usual way.

(my emphasis)

That’s exactly what you are asking for: HB to end in the usual way, which includes the 4w notice period when the conditions for it are satisfied.  The Circular doesn’t even address the issue of notice periods.