Pension credit and non dependant

I have a client who is aged 77 and in receipt of Pension Credit. She lives in Local Authority rented accomodation. Her gradaughter’s ex boyfriend became homeless and she let him move into her property. Revenues and Benefits are treating him as a non dependant. He is working and she is having the relevant non dependant deductions taken from her HB/CTB. He is making up this money to her, so she does not loose out by having him there, but she does not consider him to be there on a commercial basis. PC are treating him as a paying boarder. They are taking into account the money he is paying for her reduction in HB/CTB, applying the £20 disregard and applying a deduction to her PC of 50% of the remainder. This would be correct if he is a lodger/boarder, but if he is a non dependant would there still be a deduction applied to her PC?

The concept of a non-dependant is only relevant to housing costs (ie mortgage interest) in IS/IRESA/IBJSA/PC and to local authority benefits - housing and council tax benefits. It’s not relevant to the personal allowances in the DWP benefits, and contributions from a non-dependant are ignored as income. Your client seems to be getting the worst of both worlds.

Thank you for that. We have appealled the PC decision that he is a commercial boarder and are arguing that he is a non dependant, so there should be no deduction

Although local authorities are separate functioning entities, their benefits and revenue services ostensibly come under the DWP umbrella.  Therefore there must be parity across the benefit system.  It is fundamentally unfair for two branches of the benefit system to treat the same facts differently thus disadvantaging a person twice.

Either the grandson is a boarder for all purposes or he is not for any purpose.  It would all depend on the underlying facts.  What was the initial agreement between the parties when he moved in?  If there was an element of commerciality then he could be a boarder and might be treated as such for both HB and PC.  If there was no commerciality then he could be a non-dep.  In that case the money he gives to her could be classed as voluntary payments and ignored providing he gets nothing back in return.  However, any meals he gets or even the provision of the roof over his head could defeat that claim.

In the HB Regs a person is not a non-dep if the money he pays is for the provision of his accommodation.  Paras 22 and 42 of schedule 5 are clear that the board and lodging provisions cover situations where the charge or an element of the charge is for the accommodation.  The PC provisions on board and lodging are less clear on the point but are clear enough, to my mind, to mirror the HB Regs.  If the roof over his head is free of charge and the money he pays to her is for food or simply to re-imburse her for loss of HB then, in my view, he is not a border but a non-dep for all benefit purposes.  If the money contains a charge for the accommodation then he is a boarder, again, for all benefit purposes.