CH/1563/2012 (Night Shelters)

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 22 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #46442
    Anonymous
    Guest

    This is a truly dreadful decision, although I have to say that I have always said funding for night shelters should not be by way of HB. I have suspended all my claims and am waiting for further guidance from DWP. What is anyone else doing?

     

    https://hbinfo.org/caselaw/ch15632012 

    #131048
    Matthew
    Participant

    Think occupation of Night Shelters fails under occupation as a home so agree that not eligible for HB. Not sure what if anything DWP can advise on this though?

    #131129
    mant
    Participant

    Is this decision solely based around night shelters? I have some night stop arrangements for 16-24 year olds where they stay in host family homes on a nightly basis but must vacate the property by 10.00am and not be allowed to stay in the property alone. Does this fall into this catergory? I called our homeless team and they have advised these customers are in effect homeless – would this mean they fall under a different provision and eligible for HB?

    #131561
    ashleyc
    Participant

    I would be interested in how LAs are interpreting this Upper Tribunal decision as we at Emmaus receive referrals from both night shelters and Nightstop schemes. I am worried about its implications, most particularly the street homeless, but also the impact on other providers.

    It seems strange to me that the government should announce yesterday a £10 million fund to help homeless people who are discharged primarily from A and E, but hospitals in general, whilst this decision appears to obviate their ability to access short term accommodation and tacitly accepts a return to rough sleeping.

    My best regards to all.

    #131562
    jmembery
    Participant

    mant, the fact that people are homeless does not in itself mean they fall under a different provision. It looks to me that the claimant in this reported decision was very probably homeless.

    However, both the Council in making it’s initial decision and the Judge in his decision makes it clear that this view was taken on the facts of this particular case. It does not mean that everyone who stays at night shelters cannot claim and receive Housing Benefit

    #131563
    Anonymous
    Guest

    People who stay at night shelters on a longer term basis (we have some who have 28 day licences) are still able to claim HB. It is the direct access ones who can’t, where the criteria identified by the Judge apply i.e. they haven’t a right to be admitted and they haven’t a right to stay the next night, nor can they leave their possessions there.

    #131565
    ashleyc
    Participant

    Thank you Jeff.

    However, HB claims in certain areas have been denied to homeless people due to this Tribunal decision and others are under consideration. Thus I am worried about street homelessness / rough sleeping increasing exponentially due to its perceived imperative.

    The facts “of this particular case” have not prevented some LAs making decisons that have and MUST be de facto adverse to rough sleepers.

    My best regards to all.

    #131568
    ashleyc
    Participant

    Hi Chris,

    Just looking at your post above, I do not want to be obtuse or confrontational but : you referred to people who stay at night shelters “on a longer term basis”. Homeless people often need to stay one night (ie at a night shelter the very definition) and not on a longer term basis. Direct access places should not be expunged due to this, it appears, unfortunate decision.

    My best regards to all

    #131574
    Anonymous
    Guest

    Ashley, I quite agree with you. This was the solution put forward by Stonepillow, who run the hostel. I too remain concerned that there will not be enough direct access beds, as are Members. Considering they are getting supporting people funding as well I don’t think they can just close down all that access. However there is a move to provide a different model of support for homeless people, one which includes providing more intensive support so that ultimately they can be rehabilitated into the community (and be exempt from the SAR!). I believe that it is proving quite effective.

    #131602
    ashleyc
    Participant

    Thanks Chris,

    This has appeared in the Guardian Blog.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/the-northerner/2013/may/15/salford-homeless-shelter-narrowgate-closes

    I make no comment but it has certainly stirred debate.

    My best regards to all.

    #131605
    twill
    Participant
    #131608
    ashleyc
    Participant
    #131611
    peterdelamothe
    Keymaster

    Simon Bagg, senior associate at law firm Lewis Silkin, said: ‘If there is a finding at an upper tribunal [as in the Anglesey case] it is legally binding, so I’m not surprised local authorities are using it.’

    I think Chris view is right….”they haven’t a right to be admitted and they haven’t a right to stay the next night, nor can they leave their possessions there”.

    An unfortunate decision but was the UT Judge wrong? I doubt it. To be fair, the UT usually finds a way to assist claimants in this type of case and the Judge tried to soften the decision by the language used…but “home” is so fundamental to the HB decision and we all use it all the time. It really does not make much sense for HB to pay…and we have been here before (pre Supporting People days with the transitional HB scheme).

    #131613
    jmembery
    Participant

    Funnily enougth Peter the pre-SP position came to my mind as well.
    I suspect that we may see some hurried legislation and possibly a super new “transitional scheme” for Night Shelters.
    Jeff

    #131614
    Matthew
    Participant

    I suspect one issue going forward is what night shelters maybe for HB anyway?
    Are these exempt accommodation (unlikely due to transitory nature of occupation) – difficult to provide care support supervision on these cases?
    Are these temporary accommodation – they may not have presented as “homeless”
    What are the costs of the night shelter if HB paid, moving into UC world what would be paid – shared room rate?

    could be funding issues in future perhaps?

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 22 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.