Capital disregards - definition of “premises”

A client, on UC, wants to know if the capital from the sale of his home case be disregarded for 6 months if he intends to use it to buy a new home in the form of a boat (static or mobile).

The term “premises” is not specifically defined in the UC regs, and the dictionary definition is confined to land and buildings.  However, in terms of entertainment and alcohol licences it is possible to apply for a “premises” licence for a boat.

Any thoughts?

Given that the Schedule 10 allows the following:

Premises
1.—(1) Premises occupied by a person as their home.

I’d say your client has a strong argument that the money is going to be used to buy something which falls to be disregarded under the above description as and when he moves in.

SARC - 02 February 2021 09:45 AM

A client, on UC, wants to know if the capital from the sale of his home case be disregarded for 6 months if he intends to use it to buy a new home in the form of a boat (static or mobile).

The term “premises” is not specifically defined in the UC regs, and the dictionary definition is confined to land and buildings.  However, in terms of entertainment and alcohol licences it is possible to apply for a “premises” licence for a boat.

Any thoughts?

“Premises” is land with any improvements such as buildings on it.

A boat, alone, wouldn’t be premises, however there are leasehold and freehold moorings out there; certainly inland it’s not unknown to buy a boat on a leasehold mooring. It’s unusual, mind, but it does happen.

I don’t now much about offshore mooring arrangements though.

Convincing a DM to disregard the capital might be… interesting.

Dan Manville - 02 February 2021 10:11 AM

“Premises” is land with any improvements such as buildings on it.

A boat, alone, wouldn’t be premises, however there are leasehold and freehold moorings out there; certainly inland it’s not unknown to buy a boat on a leasehold mooring. It’s unusual, mind, but it does happen.

I don’t now much about offshore mooring arrangements though.

Convincing a DM to disregard the capital might be… interesting.

But if the boat itself isn’t disregarded under para.1 as your main or only home, why isn’t it’s value taken into account? Is it a personal possession?

I am not sure that “premises” is something which has a universal definition as against being something that needs to be read in context and I tend to agree with Paul that this particular context points towards it being disregarded (although it may be something which needs to be argued about).

Sweet and Maxwell cites R(IS)3/96 as authority that “premises” in the equivalent IS disregards was to be read in line with the terminology of “dwelling occupied as the home” and we know from CH/318/2005 that “dwelling” can be read inclusive of boats which also tends to point in that direction.

yebbut, how I read the OP was whether, if their client sells their house, the proceeds could be disregarded pursuant to para 13:

13.  An amount received within the past 6 months which is to be used for the purchase of premises that the person intends to occupy as their home where that amount:

(a)is attributable to the proceeds of the sale of premises formerly occupied by the person as their home;

Elliot Kent - 02 February 2021 11:03 AM

I am not sure that “premises” is something which has a universal definition as against being something that needs to be read in context and I tend to agree with Paul that this particular context points towards it being disregarded (although it may be something which needs to be argued about).

Sweet and Maxwell cites R(IS)3/96 as authority that “premises” in the equivalent IS disregards was to be read in line with the terminology of “dwelling occupied as the home” and we know from CH/318/2005 that “dwelling” can be read inclusive of boats which also tends to point in that direction.

The counterpoint is that “dwelling” in the LGFA has the same meaning as “hereditament” in the ‘47 Rates Act and a boat only becomes part of a hereditament once you fasten it to a mooring. It only gains the permanence of “premises” once it’s moored…

It’s tricky turf and I agree that I wouldn’t be making promises either way.

There might be some insight in the recent decision about licences but I’ve not got time to be checking that now.

edit: I see ESA hold times are still momentous.

From the licence decision, CH/3284/2017

By virtue of regulation 2(4) of the 2006 Regulations, a ‘dwelling’ is comprised of more than simply the houseboat. It includes the land used for the purposes of mooring it. When a houseboat is moored, the dwelling is comprised for housing benefit purposes of the houseboat itself, the canal or river bank used for mooring and, probably, also the land beneath the vessel (given the Interpretation Act 1978 definition of land, which includes land covered by water)

I agree that this is all tricky turf. A purposive interpretation would include an intention to buy a boat to live on but it’s stretching the ordinary meaning of the word “premises.” If it were me I would advise the client (1) that it can’t be guaranteed that the money will be disregarded, but (2) to declare the money to DWP in terms something like: “This is money from the sale of my former home, which I have earmarked for the purchase of my future home” ie without mentioning the word “premises” at all. Then wait to see if DWP pick up on the point. Somehow I can’t see a DM specifically inquiring whether the client intends to purchase “premises”, as opposed to some other type of home.