Break in entitlement

Currently, there are 0 users and 3 guests visiting this topic.
Viewing 5 posts - 31 through 35 (of 35 total)
  • Author
  • #94715
    Julian Hobson

    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).


    2 – in accordance with Regulation 29 (1) and 36 (3)

    Julian Stanbury

    I must admit, i’ve been struggling to find the reference to this mystical “1 week break”. So I’m glad to not be alone.

    I think the DWP have over complicated or under simplified things. Or the opposite.

    Movement onto LHA seems to be to occur when a new claim is made. New claims commonly occur after a period of nil entitlement, which would normally be 1 week at least.

    However you can currently have a new claim immediately following an old claim, under the EPP regs. However, there is movement afoot to make dealing with an inwork period after an EPP a change of circs.

    I think, not entirely sure as i dislike the wording of the LHA regs, that the concept of “new claim = LHA movement” rests on the duty to determine an eligible rent on a new claim, not the new claim itself.

    I reckon this is all in SI 2007 no 2868 Reg 1, paras 5 & 6.

    On the subject of rent free weeks, the regs had been changed to draw a distinction between,

    a) collection free periods (think council tax, normally feb and mar)
    b) rent free periods

    Collection free periods represent a collection arrangement, not a rent liability, so HB ignores them and is calculated and paid over 52 weeks.

    Rent free periods are factored back into the HB calculation as required.

    Rent free periods would not constitute a break in entitlement and there is no need for a new claim to reinstate benefit afterwards.

    Hope that all seems ok, any thoughts?


    According to our LHA training, the end of an EPP will constitute a change of circs and no longer require a new claim form to be completed.


    And thanks to disabling the HTML, I’ve just been able to read the whole of this thread, and find that this was already mentioned 🙄 So sorry for being behind!

Viewing 5 posts - 31 through 35 (of 35 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.