Terms & Conditions

[seanosul]

Not as nice and easy as this appears. Can an LA legally pay a claimant (not their landlord) on a calendar monthly basis?

If so how under both the Pre and Post 06 Regulations?

[Anonymous]

Hi Sean,

I think you can. HB reg 92(1) (or 90(1) as was) prescribes that HB can be paid 2 or 4 weekly, or monthly. How you get your software to do it is a different matter.

That said, I’ve never seen it done.

Cheers,

Darren

[Anonymous]

Hi Sean,

I think you can. HB reg 92(1) (or 90(1) as was) prescribes that HB can be paid 2 or 4 weekly, or monthly. How you get your software to do it is a different matter.

That said, I’ve never seen it done.

Cheers,

Darren

[markp]

Reg 92 (1) doesn’t say you can pay monthly. It allows for 2 weekly, 4 weekly or, with the person entitled’s consent, intervals greater than one month.

The only monthly reference I can find in in Para 4 and this only applies to landlords being the payee.

That’s how I read it but, as ever, willing to be corrected.

Incidentally, I agree it’s pathetic as most rents in the private sector are charged monthly (and Joe Public sees four weeks as one month and I’ve given up trying to explain the difference to said Joe Public!) but this is the world of Benefits!

Do I know what I'm doing? The jury's out on that........................

[aosulliv]

There isnt anything to say in the regs that you can do that with a tenant. As Mark P says 2 / 4 weekly or intervals of a longer period.

[seanosul]

[quote:b662d9b93f]90.- Frequency of payment of a rent allowance

(1) Subject to the following provisions of this regulation any rent allowance other than a payment made in accordance with regulation 88(2) or (3) or 91 (time and manner of payment, payment on account of rent allowance) shall be paid at intervals of 2 or 4 weeks notice or, with the consent of the person entitled, at intervals greater than one month.
[/quote:b662d9b93f]

The reg in question. On a loose reading of the law can anyone see a justification for a month or greater frequency with the consent of a claimant?

[markp]

I suppose if the claimant pays rent at a frequency greater than a month (not that I’ve ever seen that in practice) this might apply.

Do I know what I'm doing? The jury's out on that........................

[seanosul]

I am trying (perhaps with a degree of desperation) to see if this could be read as a month or greater.

[markp]

Sean,

I think that it would have to be a very loose reading and not one I’d like to explain to TTS etc.

Do I know what I'm doing? The jury's out on that........................

[Anonymous]

Darren is the only one seeing clearly here. The rest of you are still bleary-eyed from Christmas booze – you are not reading Reg 92(1) closely enough. It says exactly the same thing that the old Reg 90(1) used to say, that is:

“rent allowance … shall be paid at intervals of two weeks, four weeks, [b:727434c9e4]one month [/b:727434c9e4]or, with the consent of the person entitled, at intervals greater than one month”.

Definitely allows monthly intervals to the claimant.

As for landlords, para (3) initially restricts payments to four-weekly in arrears, but then para (4) allows monthly after all.

So I’d say you have the option of monthly irrespective of whom payments are made to.

[seanosul]

It is not the Appeal Service it is Auditors and the DWP. It is part of a rather costly Audit qualification that my current LA has from a previous year. I could try argue on the basis of explaining the concept of zero and that and that 1 = 1 > 1. Is there any fuzzy math expert out there?

[seanosul]

Peter – that is from the current regulation – post 06 – of which I am not worrying about. The pre 06 regulation did not include the term or monthly.

[Anonymous]

It did in my Findlay

[seanosul]

Fuzzy logic mathemitician no longer needed (for now)
I am going to use this

Which is the official version of the Regs!

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/SI/si1987/Uksi_19871971_en_20.htm#mdiv90

Before I jump up and down on the DWP that means the regs the DWP hold and the regs on here are incorrect ?

[Anonymous]

The OPSI text from your link shows the 1987 Regs as trhey were in 1987, but amazingly that bit is still correct: monthly option available.

The 1987 Regs on this site do seem to have a typo.

I think there is also a strong possibility that the DWP auditors are reading the correct version of the Regs but not understanding it properly.

[Author]

Posts