Reply To: Size restriction but overnight carer

Peter Barker

I’d say that there are sufficient functional links between HB and DHPs that it could be said the failure to rely on info provided in support of a DHP application when making HB decisions is an official error. In fact I would guess that the documents are literally on the same EDM file.

That provides you with “any time” grounds to revise any decision made since April 2017. As we were in the 1% annual rent reduction years in April 2017, I would assume there was a decision at that time reducing the eligible rent for HB, so you can revise it and any others made in the meantime.

In fact, come to think of it, the definition of “person who requires overnight care” was there from 2011 where the claimant or partner required overnight care, what happened in 2017 was that it was widened to include persons other than the claimant and partner.

Is it possible that you used a DHP instead of allowing a room for an overnight carer because the spare bedroom that’s causing the problems here is not where the daughter sleeps? If so, it cannot be relied on to satisfy the overnight care rule. There was an LHA case in Bolton where the living room became a “bedroom” during the night when the carer unfolded a camp bed, but you don’t to use that argument in a bedroom tax case because you’d be increasing the number of bedrooms.