A18 2005 & A8 2006 Council Tenant Change of Address

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 47 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #8802
    seanosul
    Participant

    Ignore the circular and think about the consequences of the regulations (generally better given the quality of DWP circulars).

    We can agree the fundamentals first

    Where there is no entitlement, the claim ends.
    Where there is no liability there is no entitlement.
    Where new entitlement exists after a period of nil entitlement a new claim is required.

    Reg 77 2(A) requires the LA to process the move with effect from the day of change.

    [quote:435c0a9a05]
    Subject to paragraphs (8) and (9), except in a case where regulation 8(3) of the Decisions and Appeals Regulations applies, where the change of circumstances is— SI 2006/2502
    (a) that a person moves into a new dwelling occupied as the home, or
    (b) any other event which—
    (i) entitles a person to be treated as occupying two dwellings as his home under regulation 7(6), or
    (ii) brings to an end a person’s right to be treated as occupying two dwellings as his home under that regulation, in a case where he has, immediately prior to the event, been treated as occupying two dwellings as his home,
    that change of circumstances shall take effect on the day on which it actually occurs.
    [/quote:435c0a9a05]

    That change causes an end to entitlement as there is no liability. Reg77 (8) Therefore comes into play.
    [quote:435c0a9a05]
    Subject to paragraph (9), where a change of circumstances occurs which has the effect of bringing entitlement to an end it shall take effect on the first day of the benefit week following the benefit week in which that change actually occurs except in a case where a person is liable to make payments, which fall due on a daily basis, in respect of a hostel in which case that change shall take effect on the day on which it actually occurs[/quote:435c0a9a05]

    No 3 day nonsense. Ok a new form needs to be completed but far preferable to old rent x number of days + 0 rent for the remains of the benefit week.

    #8803
    Anonymous
    Guest

    I too think we should be looking at a weekly award of HB in every case even though, as Glenys says, the amount of benefit might not reflect a full week’s rent.

    But as I said earlier in the thread, surely this is a case where Reg 7(7) would apply on the old home for the rest of the week? How on earth does the claimant avoid that week’s liability? They cannot, unless the Council waives it, in which 3/7 or whatever would be quite appropriate.

    If you look at para (9) of Reg 79 as a freestanding provision, and not just a qualification of para (8), this approach works because it means that para (9) can apply without entitlement coming to an end.

    I think this is the best way to deal with such cases: Reg 7(7) backed up by Reg 79(9), having effect somewhat counter-intuitively as a change of circs during a continuing award (as distinct from the end of entitlement).

    #8804
    Anonymous
    Guest

    In response to Sean’s last comment, I think the problem there is that para (2A) does not apply if entitlement ends … you go to paras (8) and (9). And yet if you apply the change from the following Monday under paras (8) and (9), by that time the new liability has already started so entitlement wouldn’t end after all. That’s the circularity I was talking about earlier. That’s why I have been persuaded that the only coherent way to deal with this is to look at entitlement by the whole week, albeit sometimes based on an amount of rent that adds up to less than a whole week [but then again Reg 7(7) comes to the rescue with Reg 79(9)]

    #8805
    Anonymous
    Guest

    sorry- I’m still confused.
    I agree that any interpretation which allows the claimant to have £ to cover their rent is correct, but what I can’t get my head round is this:
    you say:
    “That change causes an end to entitlement as there is no liability.”.
    I don’t see why liability ends. The tenant would still be liable for the full rent to the end of the week. So if liability doesn’t end, entitlement doesn’t end.
    Does it come down to the argument (used previously in discussions re the FAQ’s in A8 about a fresh claim also being paid from the date of move- which I also disagree with!)- that liability is inextricaby linked with occupation? I prefer Peter Barker’s view that they are 2 separate concepts. Therefore the fact that (in this scenario) the tenant has physically moved out of the property doesn’t end his liability.
    ?????
    Sorry to keep going on- have to get it sorted in my head!

    #8806
    seanosul
    Participant

    The entitlement ending is what enables you to pay to the end of the benefit week. There would be a break in entitlement if no new claim form was submitted; this works in much the same way as an extended payment of benefit which would also result in a continuous claim if the claimant makes a new claim.

    #8807
    Anonymous
    Guest

    my previous message was posted before the last 2 (including peter’s) came up so i don’t think i’m confused any more! thanks.
    (well not unless there’s another one being sent while i type this!!!!….)

    #8808
    Anonymous
    Guest

    i knew it! spoke too soon!.
    I agree ending entitlement WOULD helpcover the rent- except that in most cases reg 7 would cover as PB said- but i don’t beleive entitlement end would HAPPEN. For the reasons I put forwad before- because liability doesn’t end, so neither does entitlement.
    yes? no? help?

    #8809
    seanosul
    Participant

    Reg 77a requires the change to be processed from the date of change. HB would continue if there was a liability for the new address. No such liability exists until the following benefit week. The liability exists for the old address, however “simplification” has resulted in that change being processed from the day of change. HB therefore ends as there is no liability for the new address. The ending of HB means that benefit is paid for the whole week in question.

    A new claim is required whether the break in claim is one day or more.

    Where I do not agree with Peter is on the unavoidable liability. How is it unavoidable where the landlord is one and the same?

    #8810
    Anonymous
    Guest

    thanks Sean, I’m clearer now. I think though, that I still disagree with the interpretation of reg 77 and its consequences. I agree the “change” is implemented from the date of change, but its about what this change actually IS. I see the change as being: change of address = change of circs but does NOT equal end of liability.
    Would appreciate anyone else’s comments on this thought as I am willing to accept I may be completely wrong- but I think it still hangs on the link (or otherwise) between occupation and liability.

    #8811
    seanosul
    Participant

    I like how the DWP said that the new regs simplified things! This was good practice for auditors at a later date as my LA is going down the route I suggested as backed up by the DWP.

    #8812
    Anonymous
    Guest

    This is the problem: a change of address takes effect from the exact day under para (2A), unless it has the effect of ending entitlement, in which case it does not take effect from the exact day.

    If we are arguing that a move to a property which as yet has no rent liability = end of entitlement, then para (2A) doesn’t apply.

    Instead, para (8) applies. Para (8) makes the change effective from the following Monday … by which time entitlement doesn’t end after all because the claimant’s new rent liability has already started. You would never have a clear day with no entitlement.

    That is why I recommend the two alternative approaches:
    – use Reg 7(7) – Reg 79(9) will bear this without entitlement ending, even though it was probably not designed to
    – if you must say that there is no HB payable for the second half of the week, that is only true in the sense that the calculation of entitlement uses less than a week’s rent. You still get HB for the week, so no interruption to entitlement.

    #8813
    seanosul
    Participant

    The point is paying for that last week of entitlement and avoiding the shortfall.

    #8814
    Ozzies Mate
    Participant

    Firstly I must say that we don’t have Council tenancies as we sold our stock however this is a situation we find with our HA’s whose liablities always start on Monday’s

    On reading the remainder of this thread since my last post I can say that we use the same principles/procedure as detailed in Peter’s last post.

    Should the claimant move in the final week of the tenancy at last property but not have liabiltiy at new until following Monday then we treat as the move neding entitlement at old property which allows payment until following Monday when we will begin to pay liability at new property.

    It did take a bit of grasping when intially came in as I can see from above but can be brought down to as simple as that.

    #8815
    seanosul
    Participant

    Do you use that to pay the whole weeks worth of entitlement? If so, on what basis?

    #8816
    Ozzies Mate
    Participant

    Yes based on the fact that due to there being no rent liability at the new property until the folloing Monday however there was still a remaining liability at the old property after the move.

    Taking this into account as said before the move can’t be classed as COC for HB purposes so is treated as ending entitlement which allows payment until following Monday thus solving your problem.

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 47 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.