Terms & Conditions

[Anonymous]

This is an odd one. 😮 I am in the unusual position of arguing with an L.A. that they should not pay us (the RSL) our communal water charges. I am convinced that reg 12(3) means ALL water charges are ineligible, but the L.A. thinks that the phrasing in 12 (3) (b) “except where he is separately liable for water charges” includes people whose charge is separately identified on the rent schedule. I think it just means where the water charge is not on the rent account at all. At least one of our other L.A.’s treat them as ineligible. We want to ensure we are allsinging from the same hymn book. Can L.A. people please tell me how you treat communal water charges and how you interpret 3 (b)? thanks.

[Anonymous]

I think you are right – Reg 12(3)(b)(i) is supposed to apply to claimants who do not have direct liability to pay water charges to the water company. The fact that you are able to identify the amount of the inclusive charge does not make the tenants “separately liable”. The test is: what happens if they don’t pay? Answer: their rent will go into arrears with you, but the water company still gets paid. So it’s clearly part of a single inclusive rent liability and not a separate charge.

[Anonymous]

thanks Peter. Does anyone else want to agree/ disagree or add anything before I go back to the L.A.? cheers

[Kevin D]

Two pieces of case law that may well be of interest:

R v Bristol CC ex p JACOBS (1999) 32 HLR 841
(Rent – water rates ineligible for HB – not in respect of, or in consequence of, use and occupation).

LB Lambeth v THOMAS (1997) EWCA Civ 1331
(Housing – LA can get order in respect of amounts of rates / water rates payable with rent)

Thomas can be obtained from Bailii. The link I had for Jacobs no longer works, so a new source is needed…. 😯 Any offers / takers?

Regards

[Anonymous]

thanks i’ll try to follow these up but if anyone can provide them or tell me where to get them (esp jacobs0 that will be a big help

[Kevin D]

Thomas is available on Bailii – http://www.bailii.org

[Anonymous]

Could this argument be simpler than it looks?

If the RSL states rent and water charges separately, then 10(1) applies in its true beautiful simplicity and HB covers only the rent.

10(3)b and 10(6) apply to cases where water is included in the rent, which the LA seems to have accepted it isn’t.

[Anonymous]

BUT I THINK I FOLLOW PETER BARKER’S STANCE THAT EVEN IF ITS A SEPARATE CHARGE, IF WE ARE CHARGING FOR IT,ITSNOT EXCLUDED. I THINK WHAT’S THE CASES WERE SAYING. (I PRESUME YOU MEANT REG 12 NOT 10 AS THATS NOW PERSONS FROM ABROAD!- AN EVEN STICKIER TOPIC 😉 )

[Anonymous]

Can I add something to this debate……

If such an item as communal lighting, or cleaning of communal areas is eligible, why aren’t communal water charges? Taking it to another degree, when this communal cleaning takes place, where’s the water coming from to clean the floors/windows, etc? Likewise for communal gardening – wouldn’t the gardner plug his lawnmower in somewhere – are we to deduct his electricity use? – and wouldn’t he use a communal water supply to water his flowers? If the RSL had just stated “Communal gardening – £1 per week”, this would be eligible whereas this would probably include an element of water use.

I can see where reg 10/12 is coming from but surely that applies to personal use and not communal? 🙄

[Anonymous]

In a case where water is metered, Reg 12(6)(c) allows the Council to estimate a reasonable amount based on the claimant’s personal consumption.

For flat rate water charges:

– Where the claimant lives in a self-contained unit, it will be separately rated for water charges and the claimant would have to pay the full amount to the water company if s/he had a private account, so it’s fair enough that s/he has the full amount deducted from the inclusive rent

– Where the claimant lives in an HMO or hostel etc, Reg 12(6)(b) contemplates an apportionment based on the claimant’s private floorspace, so that would exclude any communal areas. [I suspect that most, if not all Councils would do something simpler here, like using a standard scale of estimated water rates]

My reading of the Regs is that strictly speaking a landlord’s specified water charge for any non-self contained accommodation, including RSL hostels, should be ignored, and the Council should do the floorspace thing. I don’t imagine for one moment that that actually happens in practice, but in theory I think it answers Anthony’s concerns.

[Anonymous]

I read reg 12 differently, but I think it depends on a definition of a self-contained unit?
Our water charges are mainly in category 2 sheltered housing for the elderly. I assumed they fell under 12(6) (a) because they’re not a hostel or HMO, but maybe we could argue that under (b) the total water charge should be apportioned out to allow the proprtion equivalent to stairs, hallways, communal rooms etc to stay eligible?
I would be grateful for your comment Peter (and anyone else of course!)

[Anonymous]

On reflection I think you are right about self-contained unit – it’s not defined in the Regs and I think it would perhaps be over-restrictive to say it means the same thing as a separately rated heraditament. I think a flatlet in a sheltered block probably is a self-contained unit, and I think the floorspace calculation only comes into play where the claimant’s dwelling for HB purposes is something like a room in a house, or a bedsit in an HMO where the inclusive rent would tend not to have a specified water charge. I think if your self-contained units in the sheltered block have a specified water charge that is based on your bills as landlord, that should be good enough!

[Anonymous]

so, just checking i’ve understood you correctly Peter- are you :
A)agreeing with my initial beleif that as a self contained unit (albeit with attached communal areas) these fall under 12 (6) (a) and so ALL water charges are ineligible (both water for personal use and water theoretically attributable to common areas) or
B) agreeing with my very uncertain “2nd thoughts” that maybe its under 12 (6) (b) and shouold be apportioned? [i:eee17b651d](but then again re-reading the commentary on an admittedly old CPAG HB /CTB legislation (14th edition) it suggests even common areas chould be calculated in the total unit area so we’d be back to the whole charge ineligible???)[/i:eee17b651d]

just need you to clarify. thanks. 🙂

[Anonymous]

So what is the consensus of opinion here? We are a LA whose LSVT landlord is trying to pull the same stunt (excuse my cynicism). After many years they have suddenly decided that part of the tenants’ water charges included in the rent are for communal use.
Incidentally I could not get a link to either case mentioned. Could someone post me the transcript?
Cheers
Chris Dring

[Kevin D]

[quote:ecf324e8c6]Thomas can be obtained from Bailii. The link I had for Jacobs no longer works, so a new source is needed…. Any offers / takers? [/quote:ecf324e8c6]

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1997/1331.html (Thomas)

For Jacobs, it may be worth tapping your legal section – ask them for a copy of the Housing Law Reports – vol 32; page 841 onwards.

My own jotter note on Jacobs states:
“Rent – water rates ineligible for HB – not in respect of, or in consequence of, use and occupation.”

Regards

[Author]

Posts