benfit on two homes

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
  • #22204


    I work for a support provider and another organisation is the landlord. We are attempting to move residents within our project. From accommodation with shared facilities to self contained accommodation. Our licence requires residents to give 28 days notice. Therefore would residents be able to make a claim for benefit on two homes as they are required to give 28 days notice considering that it is the same landlord. My local benefit office say’s not as they would expect the landlord to have managed the moves more efficently. I am looking for a way around residents waiting for social fund decisions and moving into accommodation with no essential items. I work with single people none of whom have children or are waiting for adaptions.

    Any feedback and I would be most grateful

    Andy Thurman

    On the face of it, I would agree with the advice you have been given & recent DWP guidance on unavoidable liability states this shouldn’t occur where the L/L is the same.

    Why is the landlord trying to stick so rigidly to the notice periods? How are they justifying making a charge to the same tenant for two properties?

    Sorry if it isn’t the response you wanted ๐Ÿ˜•


    I agree with Andy. This seems an attempt to take advantage of the HB scheme.



    I doubt the DWP [b:9ee526384a]guidance[/b:9ee526384a] would carry much weight with an Appeals Tribunal…


    Is there not a further obstacle to overlapping HB in the situation described at the start of this thread: as far as I can tell the sequence of events involves the overlap arising before the claimant has moved out of the old home – something the Regs stubbornly refuse to cater for except where disability adaptations are being fitted. For anyone else, there can be no overlap before the move irrespective of whether it could have been avoided or not.


    I agree with Peter Barker that where the claimant has not yet moved out of the old home, its is only possible for HB to be paid on the new home where it is being adapted for disability needs, but I disagree with the previous posts re benefit on 2 homes where the same landord is involved with both.

    This is because despite the DWP guidance, the Regulations concentrate on whether or not the CLAIMANT reasonably have avoided the dual liability. The actions of any landlord who effectively adopted a take it or leave it approach, even when both properties are ownd by that same landlord does not come into this question.

    Contast the question of unavoidable liability in what is now Reg 7(6)(d)

    “in the case where a person has moved into a new dwelling occupied as the home, except where paragraph (4) applies, for a period not exceeding 4 benefit weeks if he could not reasonably have avoided liability in respect of two dwellings; ”

    with the question of whether it is resonable that benefit should be paid in Reg 7(6)(a)

    “a) for a period not exceeding 52 weeks in the case where he has left and remains absent from the former dwelling occupied as his home through fear of violence in that dwelling or by a former member of his family andโ€”
    (i) it is reasonable that housing benefit should be paid in respect of both his former dwelling and his present dwelling occupied as the home;”

    The absence of a reuirement that “it is resonable that housing benefit be paid..” in Reg 7(6)(d) means that Councils have far less scope to refuse HB on 2 homes where a notice period has to be served, even where the same landlord is involved with both properties

    The reasons landlords stick rigidly to the notice period is simple. It avoids voids. Dont forget that landlords (even RSL’s) may well have mortgages or loans to pay on their properties. The lenders are no going to forgo the interest just because the place is empty

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.