Including grandchild in HB claim

LHA claimant is single parent in work, her daughter is 17 and now also a single parent, not on IS. The grandmother gets CTC for both, CHB is claimed by the respective mothers. There is no child allowance for the grandchild in HB. What factors should be used by the LA to decide whether the grandmother is responsible for, and normally lives with, the grandchild? HB Reg 20 says “For the purposes of these Regulations a child or young person shall be the responsibility of only one person in any benefit week”, so I don’t think this means the CHB is decisive. But moving the CHB claim to the grandmother may help?

I don’t actually know what the grandmother put on the HB claim form about the grandchild, but it isn’t designed to ask. While the standard HCTB1 asks about “any children in your household” and then asks about who gets CHB for them, the form used by our LA asks: “Do you have children who live with you?” If yes, then: “Do you or your partner get CHB for the children who live with you?” Only if yes, does it ask for any details of that child.

Another suggested hypothetical way to increase entitlement is if the 17-y-o becomes a joint tenant, and claims IS and HB in her own right, so that the rent could be apportioned between two LHA claims. But, wouldn’t the reasoning in CH/107/2010 mean this would only work if there was exclusive possession of rooms?

Sorry Duncan, but that isn’t correct.  For HB/CTB, child benefit is only a decider where the dependent spends equal time in two different households.  In all other cases, it is where the child’s normal lives, irrespective of who gets child benefit.

{Edited to add}  Or have I misunderstood something in your post?

Just to clarify: there is no great-grandmother in the picture, by “grandmother” I meant the eldest of the 3 generations.

In all other cases, it is where the child’s normal lives

So how do you decide whether a baby “normally lives” with its mother, or with its grandmother, if they are all in the same house? The grandmother is the head tenant, she is the one mainly financially supporting them, she gets the CTC, should that be sufficient? If it is, for argument’s sake, then should we looking at supersession of the original decision (we’re out of the normal appeal time)?

If the daughter is a child or qualifying young person and normally lives with her mother (and the mother is responsible for her and not treated as not responsible) and the daughter’s child normally lives with the daughter (and the daughter is responsible for her and not treated as not responsible) then they all share the one household (regs 20 and 21 of the HB Regs).  A qualifying young person is a person between 16 and 19 who is in full time non-advanced education or approved training.

A sensible provision in my view recognizing as it does the reality that children under 16 sometimes do get pregnant and it would be harsh to financially penalize the grandparent who will usually be subsidising the grandchild as children under 16 cannot get IS/JSA.  The provision was later extended to cover “young persons” when IS/JSA was, with some exceptions, withdrawn from them.

Thanks. I’ve just realised that there should presumably be an extra room in the LHA rate for the grandchild too ...