Forum Home → Discussion → Housing costs → Thread
loss of HB & JSA jobseekers
I would welcome you thoughts on the following:
The Housing Benefit (Habitual Residence) (Amendment) Regulations 2014
If a claimant has been assessed by DWP as a JSA jobseeker rather than a JSA retained worker status and refused HB, can they still qualify for HB under a different route?
eg Teixeira - primary carer of a child in education
or is everything else trumped by the JSA jobseeker status in terms of entitlement to HB?
None of the examples in HB Circular A6/2014 refer to the JSA claimants having children ...
Many thanks
The wording of the HB Regs was amended on 1/4/14 in the following way:
BEFORE - anyone who gets IS, ESA(ir) or JSA(ib) cannot be a PFA. That includes jobseekers. Otherwise, jobseekers are excluded from HB under Reg 10(3A).
AFTER - anyone who gets IS or ESA(ir) cannot be a PFA; anyone who gets JSA(ib) cannot be a PFA as long as they have a right to reside (any right to reside) other than as a jobseeker. Otherwise, jobseekers remain excluded as before.
The pracrical effect of this is to prevent jobseekers from qualifying through the back door as a result of the “passporting” effect of JSA(ib). But for anyone with an alternative right to reside, nothing has changed. If the person happens to be on JSA(ib) that alternative right to reside could include any of the following:
- retained worker status;
- family member of another EEA national;
- worker/self-employed person in their own right working less than 16 hours but still effective and genuine
- permanent right to reside
- it could and probably should also include a derived right to reside as a Teixeira carer, but for a possible technical difficulty see my comment on this thread: http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/6693/. The problem is that according to Reg 15A of the Immigration (EEA) Regs 2006 as soon as someone exercises their own principal right of residence, including as a jobseeker, that suppresses their derived right to reside. So a Teixeira parent who is an EEA national himself/herself and who decides to look for work would appear to lose his/her Teixeira R2R and become a jobseeker instead. I think the courts might ultimately find a way round that but it is a possible problem for now. I say “possible” because it is only an issue if the Council has thought it through to such pedantic lengths. It is just as likely they will accept Teixeira residence without any fuss.
Important point here is that it is the Council’s decision to make.
Many thanks for that HB Anroak. Your line of thinking confirms what I was thinking, but I was tying myself in knots and doubting myself! I had it in my head that derived rights would only be looked at if you had no rights in your own name.
Interesting point that the LA can reach its own decision. In practice I wonder how many will do so and how many will just accpet the DWP notification and not delve further ....
I had it in my head that derived rights would only be looked at if you had no rights in your own name.
That is certainly how Reg 15A looks. Not a problem unless the right you have in your own name is “jobseeker”.