× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Housing costs  →  Thread

Housing Benefits and Gambling Winnings

Joanne Woodcock
forum member

Manchester Advice

Send message

Total Posts: 5

Joined: 22 July 2010

Any idea on how winnings/earnings from small regular gambling is treated for benefit (specifically HB/CTB) purposes?  Client is not claiming JSA or ESA and is living off small regular gambling winnings.  Wants to know whether this is treated as earnings for HB or savings (if below £6,000).  I can’t find anything in any of the ref books.

Stainsby
forum member

Welfare rights adviser - Plumstead Community Law Centre

Send message

Total Posts: 622

Joined: 17 June 2010

Its not earnings because the winnings are not subject to national insurance contributions. 

Income and capital is not defined in the legisalation and so the words are given their normal every day meaning, but as the winnings are regular, that gives them the quality of income rather than capital.

This means that the winnings are most likely to be assessed as income other than earnings and so the earned income disregards will not be applied.

Is this person some kind of mathermatician with a very good knowledge of statistics?  If not then surely he cannot keep on relying on this winning streak

Kevin D
forum member

Independent HB/CTB administrator, consultant & trainer (Essex)

Send message

Total Posts: 474

Joined: 16 June 2010

Blimey!  I’m in shock (despite being all but exhausted).  I know something Stainsby doesn’t… (is it April Fool’s day??)

Gambling winnings are capital for benefit purposes - CH/0412/2007 & CH/4143/2007 (same decision).

File Attachments

Stainsby
forum member

Welfare rights adviser - Plumstead Community Law Centre

Send message

Total Posts: 622

Joined: 17 June 2010

CH/0412/2007 is not on the Upper Tribunal’s website, nor is CIS/2753/2000, (cited by Judge Ward)

Nevertheless I have downloaded CH/0412/2007 for future reference as it is a binding authority unless and until another Judge disagrees with it.

Thanks Kevin, I will concede that I was wrong on this one

[ Edited: 7 Dec 2010 at 02:24 pm by Stainsby ]
Kevin D
forum member

Independent HB/CTB administrator, consultant & trainer (Essex)

Send message

Total Posts: 474

Joined: 16 June 2010

No problem - just glad to get it sorted.

Joanne Woodcock
forum member

Manchester Advice

Send message

Total Posts: 5

Joined: 22 July 2010

Thanks that’s really helpful.  I presume the same would apply to JSA?  Winnings would be counted as capital so still entitled to JSA as long as doesn’t go over £6k

Stainsby
forum member

Welfare rights adviser - Plumstead Community Law Centre

Send message

Total Posts: 622

Joined: 17 June 2010

No reason why it should not apply to JSA

Gareth Morgan
forum member

CEO, Ferret, Cardiff

Send message

Total Posts: 2009

Joined: 16 June 2010

“Its not earnings because the winnings are not subject to national insurance contributions.”

I’m not sure that I understand this.  I don’t believe that there are provisions which specifically exclude them from NI.

The question is surely whether the ‘money’ is the product of employment.

If he was running a casino then his income would be the product of gambling, him v the punters, and that would certainly be earnings.

If he is occupied in this self-employed endeavour as his way of making a living then I can see some compelling reasons why his net gain could count as earnings.

I can, however, see some interesting arguments around ‘in expectation of….’.

Gareth Morgan
forum member

CEO, Ferret, Cardiff

Send message

Total Posts: 2009

Joined: 16 June 2010

...and that’ll teach me to read the rest of the posts before chiming in.

Kevin D
forum member

Independent HB/CTB administrator, consultant & trainer (Essex)

Send message

Total Posts: 474

Joined: 16 June 2010

Just for completeness, I have heard it argued that (specifically) poker is not gambling because there is a level of skill involved.  However, the Court of Appeal (in R v Kelly) concluded that while poker did indeed involve skill, the degree of chance was still sufficiently high for poker to be regarded as gambling, in law.

Kelly:  http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2008/137.html