Bedroom tax for disabled claimant

I’m supporting a tetraplegic male who moved into a 2 bedroom adapted property in 2010. He was on legacy benefits until his previous but 2 support worker sought advice & was told he would be better off on UC. He’s subsequently moved to UC and is now being affected by the bedroom tax.
I’ve tried to no avail to request an exemption from this due to the fact that the property was built specifically for his disability and he moved in before the bedroom tax rules were introduced. UC are refusing this on the grounds that he’s a single claimant and there is currently no overnight carer staying. A DHP has now been refused and he’s been advised to continue seeking exemption via his UC account, based on his disability.
We’re getting to the stage where he can’t make any more cutbacks on his expenditure and his PIP is completely wiped out due to his care package financial contribution & his motability car - although a review of his financial contribution is finally underway. All of the worry is now beginning to affect his mental health. His benefits are correct - apart from (imho) the housing costs deduction due to bedroom tax.
My question is, does anyone have experience of this as I feel he’s being treated unfairly; he’s unable to downsize as there isn’t a property around here which would be suitable. I’d welcome comments/suggestions from anyone who’s experienced this situation before, and if you managed to get UC to apply common sense and exempt him from the bedroom tax.
I guess failing this, it would be for him to lose his independence each night and request his care package is increased to provide for an overnight carer - which to me would cost the government more than exempting him from the bedroom tax. Thanks in advance :-)

Hi Janey, the exemptions to the bedroom tax for disabled people are finite and are limited in the legislation to:
- extra room needed for a regular carer to stay overnight
- disabled couple unable to share a room
- disabled child unable to share with sibling

If none of those apply then UC (or HB, if it were legacy benefits) can’t apply common sense; in that case I think it would be worth challenging the refusal of DHP - why was it refused? Based on income? Would a robustly explained budget showing that he has no disposable income spare once essentials are paid and taking into account loss of PIP due to his care package, make his case more clear?

The DHP guidance for local authorities, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/discretionary-housing-payments-guidance-manual/discretionary-housing-payments-guidance-manual, indicates that your client should be in a priority group for DHP, Section 10: Priority groups
“disabled people who need, or have had, significant adaptations made to their property, or where they are living in a property particularly suited to their needs.”

As DHP isn’t a benefit with right of MR/appeal then I think it would be best to follow the LA’s DHP review procedure if any, and then seek some public law advice about Judicial Review/Equality Act action

Hopefully his Adult Care financial assessment being reviewed is taking into account his rising costs (food, utilities etc.) and his need to make rent payments if no DHP is in place?

It sounds to me as if you are engaged with him to an extent that amounts to more than minimal support, and since you work for the landlord that makes it exempt accommodation.  No bedroom tax in that case, but he shouldn’t be on UC housing element.  Common sense solution would be to switch to HB going forward and everyone quietly forget about what went before, although you never know with DWP.  If DWP decides there has been an overpayment of the housing element, hopefully it will be possible to identify something in the DHP-related communications that passes as notification of an intention to claim HB, allowing HB to be awarded for the same period as any UC overpayment.  But it would be a lot easier for everyone if the Council says it looks as if he has started to receive more than minimal support from the landlord and it has become exempt accommodation as of now.  Time the HB claim as near to the start of a UC AP as possible.

Thanks both - it’s not exempt accommodation (which would make things a bit easier) so I’ll go down the route of asking the local authority to look at their decision to refuse the DHP.

Appreciate your in put; thanks again

I wouldn’t rule out exempt accommodation so hastily.  It’s not a designation of the property - it is a legal consequence of the claimant receiving more than minimal support from his non-profit landlord which, as far as I can see, he is at the moment.  This might have been a general needs tenancy before he lived there and it might revert to general needs after he leaves, but with him in it there is a possibility that it is exempt accommodation.

It depends on how much support he is going to get from you once the issue of the bedroom tax is sorted out.  if you are going to continue your supportive engagement with once the tenancy is in steady state, then it is exempt accommodation.  It is worth investigating that possibility further I’d say.