Terms & Conditions

[swatts]

HB is payable to a lone parent with a baby in a refuge. She is then given a tenancy with an RSL but cannot move in as she is waiting for a social fund loan.
Can we pay HB for up to 4 weeks before her moving in date, while still covering the hostel charge? (Benefit on two homes)
We have a difference of opinion here; some state that we cannot pay on the new dwelling because the ‘prior to moving in’ rules do not apply if the claimant has had a rental liability elsewhere immediately before moving in. Others think that, providing that Reg 7(8)(c) applies, we can pay.
Any help would be appreciated.

[Clive Hayward]

I don’t think you can. I think she needs to satisfy HB Reg 7 (8)(c)(i) (move delayed due to adaptations to new property due to disablement needs) because it’s not sufficient to be able to treat her as occupying the new home: you need to be able to treat her as occupying BOTH.

I stand to be corrected though….

[JamesPickering]

I agree.

Benefit before occupation can only be paid to persons not receiving HB in respect of their former home. HBR 7(8 Eight).

In order to claim HB on both properties the claimant must move into the new property and claim overlapping HB for the former home. HBR 7(7).

J

[Anonymous]

I agree – we cannot pay. See CH/2201/2002

[Kevin D]

I agree with Clive.

HBR 7(8 ) doesn’t cover 2 homes. The only provision for 2 homes is under [b:6f37811263]HBR 7(6)[/b:6f37811263].

Where a clmt has delayed a move into the second property, the ONLY provision for 2 homes in those circumstances falls under [b:6f37811263]HBR 7(6)([u:6f37811263]e[/u:6f37811263])[/b:6f37811263].

In order to satisfy that provision, the delay MUST be due to adaptations for disablement needs – no other reason is relevant in 2 homes cases.

Several CDs confirm the two homes rule where the move into the second home has been delayed:

CH/3458/2004
CSHB/0385/2005**
CH/2004/2005
CH/2201/2002
CH/3296/2003
CH/3857/2004
CH/0149/2006 (looks at the nature of adaptations)

Adaptations must be more than cosmetic decoration / carpeting.

**CSHB/0873/2005 directly contradicts CSHB/0385/2005. However, it is strongly suggested that 0873 was wrongly decided – see the discussion on an earlier thread: new.hbinfo.org.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6833.

Hope the above helps.

Regards

[Author]

Posts