I was under the impression that Reg.8(2) means that a person has a liability even where it has been discharged. I remember looking at a very similar case to the one you describe, and my initial reaction was to say that the clt was not entitled as she had no liability for the period during which her ex partner had paid the rent (his name was on the tenancy agreement as well – she said because he had paid the deposit for her and LL insisted). I was pointed in the direction of 8(2) by a more senior officer.
As regards the treatment of payments from an absent partner, I also recall being told that they were treated as maintenance, but cannot seem to lay my hands on the relevant provision at the moment!
