Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Housing costs  →  Thread

bedroom tax in the upper tribunal

 < 1 2 3

Daphne
Administrator

rightsnet writer / editor

Send message

Total Posts: 2683

Joined: 14 March 2014

New UT decision posted by nearly legal which restates that the landlord’s bedroom count is only a starting point and not determinative. Not yet published.

Daphne
Administrator

rightsnet writer / editor

Send message

Total Posts: 2683

Joined: 14 March 2014

Interesting article by SPeye Joe with a bedroom tax UT decision (not yet published) that says a bedroom should be -

capable of accommodating a single adult bed, a bedside table and somewhere to store clothes (see paragraph 33 of Nelson), as well as providing space for dressing and undressing

SPeye Joe reckons this to be a floor space of 65.81 square feet.

https://speye.wordpress.com/2016/03/31/bedroom-tax-the-defining-moment-as-ut-decision-makes-it-history/

Ruth Knox
forum member

RAISE Benefits Advice Team, Liverpool

Send message

Total Posts: 409

Joined: 27 January 2014

I think this decision sets out the absolute bottom limit for a bedroom and will be useful for some of the small rooms appeals.  Unfortunately, I have had a few decisions from Upper Tribunal which apply the same standards (i.e. bed, bedside table, storage and room to dress and undress) and find them possible in rooms around 60 square feet.  (I will check the specific measurements tomorrow).  Ruth

chacha
forum member

Benefits dept - Hertsmere Borough Council

Send message

Total Posts: 454

Joined: 13 December 2010

Ruth Knox - 01 April 2016 10:07 PM

I think this decision sets out the absolute bottom limit for a bedroom and will be useful for some of the small rooms appeals.  Unfortunately, I have had a few decisions from Upper Tribunal which apply the same standards (i.e. bed, bedside table, storage and room to dress and undress) and find them possible in rooms around 60 square feet.  (I will check the specific measurements tomorrow).  Ruth

Hi Ruth, did you get round to checking the specific measurements? Thanks.

shawn mach
Administrator

rightsnet.org.uk

Send message

Total Posts: 3003

Joined: 14 April 2010

Daphne - 31 March 2016 02:26 PM

Interesting article by SPeye Joe with a bedroom tax UT decision (not yet published) that says a bedroom should be -

capable of accommodating a single adult bed, a bedside table and somewhere to store clothes (see paragraph 33 of Nelson), as well as providing space for dressing and undressing

SPeye Joe reckons this to be a floor space of 65.81 square feet./

CH/454/2015 is now available: http://www.osscsc.gov.uk/Aspx/view.aspx?id=4824

Stuart
Administrator

rightsnet editor

Send message

Total Posts: 751

Joined: 21 March 2016

The claimant has now requested permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal according to the notes to the decision.

http://www.osscsc.gov.uk/Aspx/view.aspx?id=4824

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 2140

Joined: 7 January 2016

Stuart - 18 April 2016 05:19 PM

The claimant has now requested permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal according to the notes to the decision.

http://www.osscsc.gov.uk/Aspx/view.aspx?id=4824

I’m confused. The claimant’s appeal was allowed and remitted for rehearing. What can they appeal further to CoA about? Anyone?

Nearlylegal
forum member

Anthony Gold Solicitors London

Send message

Total Posts: 16

Joined: 18 March 2014

Daphne - 31 March 2016 02:26 PM

Interesting article by SPeye Joe with a bedroom tax UT decision (not yet published) that says a bedroom should be -

capable of accommodating a single adult bed, a bedside table and somewhere to store clothes (see paragraph 33 of Nelson), as well as providing space for dressing and undressing

SPeye Joe reckons this to be a floor space of 65.81 square feet.

https://speye.wordpress.com/2016/03/31/bedroom-tax-the-defining-moment-as-ut-decision-makes-it-history/

The trouble with Joe’s argument is that it relies on extra statutory prescriptions for room size, which the very same UT decision rules out as having any purchase in principle. You can’t validly derive a specific minimum space from the UT decision.

There will obviously be rooms which are too small to be practically used as a bedroom, but the UT (and FTTs) are not going to bother with ‘this room is 2 inches too small’ style arguments.

Daphne
Administrator

rightsnet writer / editor

Send message

Total Posts: 2683

Joined: 14 March 2014

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK - 19 April 2016 10:32 AM
Stuart - 18 April 2016 05:19 PM

The claimant has now requested permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal according to the notes to the decision.

http://www.osscsc.gov.uk/Aspx/view.aspx?id=4824

I’m confused. The claimant’s appeal was allowed and remitted for rehearing. What can they appeal further to CoA about? Anyone?

I’m guessing Paul that he’s appealing against the judge’s ruling that you can’t rely on the other bits of housing legislation/guidance in deciding whether a room is a bedroom?

Summary due up shortly…

 

nevip
forum member

Welfare rights adviser - Sefton Council, Liverpool

Send message

Total Posts: 3007

Joined: 16 June 2010

I agree.  It’s probably on the point that the decision in Nelson should not be followed and on the point that the overcrowding provisions cannot be used to interpret regulation B13.

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 2140

Joined: 7 January 2016

Thanks both :-)

HB Anorak
forum member

Benefits consultant/trainer - hbanorak.co.uk, East London

Send message

Total Posts: 2214

Joined: 12 March 2013

The reason why the claimant is appealing is because he lost: the claimant originally won at the FtT and the Council appealed to the UT.  The UT has upheld the Council’s appeal and sent it back

Elliot Kent
forum member

Shelter

Send message

Total Posts: 1585

Joined: 14 July 2014

Nearlylegal - 19 April 2016 11:08 AM
Daphne - 31 March 2016 02:26 PM

Interesting article by SPeye Joe with a bedroom tax UT decision (not yet published) that says a bedroom should be -

capable of accommodating a single adult bed, a bedside table and somewhere to store clothes (see paragraph 33 of Nelson), as well as providing space for dressing and undressing

SPeye Joe reckons this to be a floor space of 65.81 square feet.

https://speye.wordpress.com/2016/03/31/bedroom-tax-the-defining-moment-as-ut-decision-makes-it-history/

The trouble with Joe’s argument is that it relies on extra statutory prescriptions for room size, which the very same UT decision rules out as having any purchase in principle. You can’t validly derive a specific minimum space from the UT decision.

There will obviously be rooms which are too small to be practically used as a bedroom, but the UT (and FTTs) are not going to bother with ‘this room is 2 inches too small’ style arguments.

Beyond that the Tribunal explained that the “room in question had a square footage of about 63 sq. ft. with a sloping ceiling that reduced its usable space considerably” yet went on to remit to the FTT.

It would be an audacious submission to say that a case where the UT held that a room with a square footage of (at most) 63 sq ft needed to go before an FTT for fact finding is authority for the view that 65.81 sq ft is the absolute minimum size.

HB Anorak
forum member

Benefits consultant/trainer - hbanorak.co.uk, East London

Send message

Total Posts: 2214

Joined: 12 March 2013

Elliot Kent - 20 April 2016 10:22 AM

It would be an audacious submission to say that a case where the UT held that a room with a square footage of (at most) 63 sq ft needed to go before an FTT for fact finding is authority for the view that 65.81 sq ft is the absolute minimum size.

Can I nominate that for pithy post of the year?