Reply To: Size restriction but overnight carer

#287026
nick dearnley
Participant

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.

I’ve just found the 2010 Regs that introduced the SSSC from 1.4.13 (HB(Amendment) Regs 2012); the ‘person who requires overnight care’ part was from 1.4.11 (SI2010/2835); you’re quire right about the wider application from 2017. It’s been so long that I’d forgotten the history.

I think it’s more likely that we used a DHP because that’s what she asked for, but also because the DHP assessment seems to have concentrated on a likely future requirement for 2 beds for being unable to share. The daughter staying is not mentioned in the assessment reasons at all, although it is on the application, so I think it was missed.

I think that factually she has always had a need for a regular albeit somewhat occasional overnight carer and a bedroom for that, so she clearly meets the criteria, and instead of using a DHP we should have simply not applied the SSSC restriction.

Does that logic stack up?