Reply To: self-contained or not?

#286531
Andy Thurman
Keymaster

“Andy T – are you around?”

I am now! I’m not sure, however, what to advise…
There is certainly the possibility of the self-contained argument (for as long as the second room is not occupied) but it may be self-defeating unless the claimant has access to the second bedroom (or you are prepared to gloss over the fact that they don’t). I suspect the second room will be locked so use of the two room rate would be dubious – the subsidy order refers to the “accommodation” rather than the “property” so this would suggest it would have to be defined as 1-bed.
It is, therefore, preferable to define it as non self-contained – legally, they are required to share the kitchen etc. and are likely to physically do so during their period of occupancy. As this is temporary accommodation, there is likely to be regular turnover of occupants – would it revert to self-contained every time either room was vacant for a short period?
So – I think I am going with non self-contained (which, as 100% rather than 90% is not too far short of the 2-bed cap).

Sense check – this is a leased property/used on licence? (Not owned by LA or on lease of more than 10 years.)

Further sense check/curiosity – £60 per night? £420 per week? For a room in shared house?