13 week rule conundrum

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #45878
    John Boxall
    Participant

    I have a claim, originally made at the start of the tenancy in December.

    However based on his income he was not entitled to HB.

    Since then he has lost his job and reclaimed.

    Now, Reg13ZA says………

    (3) Subject to paragraph (4), where the relevant authority is satisfied that the claimant or a linked person was able to meet the financial commitments for his dwelling when they were entered into, there shall be no maximum rent during the first 13 weeks of the claimant's award of housing benefit.

    (4) Paragraph (3) shall not apply where a claimant or the claimant's partner was previously entitled to benefit in respect of an award of housing benefit which fell wholly or partly less than 52 weeks before the commencement of the claimant's current award of housing benefit.

    Now he wasnt previously entitled to HB in the last 52 weeks, so he's OK from that point of view, BUT given that he claimed when he moved into his new property, although he was not entitled, was he able to '…….meet the financial commitments for his dwelling when they were entered into, ……' ??

    I'm hoping the answers yes, but I have some doubts

    Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery. The blossom is blighted, the leaf is withered, the god of day goes down upon the dreary scene, and—and in short you are for ever floored.

    Wilkins Micawber, Ch12 David Copperfield

    #129188
    andyrichards
    Participant

    I would say yes. It’s about awards, not claims. Objectively he could afford the rent when he took on the tenancy – even if he evidently wasn’t sure he could at the time!

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.