Reply To: Break in entitlement

#94715
Julian Hobson
Participant

If Richard and I are correct then I think s130(c) SSCBA 1992 is important.

That section states (amongst other things) that a person is entitled to housing benefit if they have no income or income below applicable amount OR income exceeds the AA but there is still an amount of HB.

It strikes me that if you were previously [i:c7fd2e9311]entitled[/i:c7fd2e9311] because you had little or no income income and there is a change that means income exceeds to the extent that you are no longer entitled to HB, then a new claim will be required to start the decision making off again.

Similarly regs 77 and 78 of the HB regs 2006 end HB where entitlement to IS JSA(I) Incap or SDA ends had been in receipt for 26 weeks or more and work is expected to last for 5 weeks or more. (EP claims)

In all other cases I think the process will be to first suspend under reg 11 or 13 of the DMA regs and then terminate (if necessary) before a new claim will be required.

This could create a problem if for example I’ve been getting IS for three weeks, the LA gets an ETD it suspends, asks for info, I provide it and demonstrate that in week 2 of my employment I had income over needs and also show a drop in subsequent weeks bringing me back into entitlement. In such a case would you:

1. terminate at the beginning of the zero entitlement week, and if so using what provision, or
2. reassess based on earnings for the whole period as demonstrating average earnings (as a Supersession), so there is no Zero entitlement week, or .
3. reassess using the actual earnings each week as demonstrating the correct income (as a change of circs), thus not requiring a new claim to bring me back into entitlement (supersession).