Forum Home → Discussion → Housing costs → Thread
1996 loophole, occupancy status?
We have a tenant who has always had a housing benefit entitlement, and has always been in occupation of her one of our homes . The tenant lived in a property prior to 1996 but it was demolished due to it being declared uninhabitable in 1999. She was then immediately transferred to one of our new properties (in 1999) where she currently resides. The council refuse to class this as a loophole case as they say “unfortunately it clearly states that the customer must have occupied the same dwelling since 01st January 1996. As this isn’t the case for this tenant therefore we wouldn’t be able to award the exemption for her”.
Is this correct?
On the basis of this post, I think they are correct.
This is not entirely correct. Please see link:
http://nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/2014/01/bedroom-tax-the-effect-of-the-pre-1996-claim-exemption/
The tenant lived in a property prior to 1996 but it was demolished due to it being declared uninhabitable in 1999.
Why was it declared uninhabitable?
All surrounding houses had been evacuated as they were all to be demolished for the build of a new road. Our tenant remained there as long as she could as she did not want to move but there was so much vandalism and looting in the vicinity the property became uninhabilable as she was scared for her safety.
All surrounding houses had been evacuated as they were all to be demolished for the build of a new road. Our tenant remained there as long as she could as she did not want to move but there was so much vandalism and looting in the vicinity the property became uninhabilable as she was scared for her safety.
Sorry, can’t see how the LA’s decision is wrong.