CTB – backdated banding decision

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #39178
    trina
    Participant

    Our customer has been in the same address since 2007.

    He has a HB claim from 10/03/08 to 29/11/09 and another starting 20/09/10.

    When he made the first claim the annexe was not separately banded so he was not invited to make a claim for CTB.

    In Oct 2010 the VOA re-banded the prerty as two separate dwellings and our customer has been sent a CT bill back to 2007.

    We invited a CTB claim which was backdated to the start of the current HB claim 20/09/10. However the customer is extremely unhappy that he has not got CTB for the period 10/03/08 – 29/11/09 because he did not know at that time that he needed to claim.

    CTB Reg 64(2) allows CTB to be paid from the date the person fist became liable if they are resident in the week the claim is treated as made.

    I have two problems with this.

    He has been made liable from 2007 but his first claim does not start until 2008. Would you agree that if he had continuous HB from 2007 we could apply CTB without having to worry about backdating rules or supersession rules?

    Seceond, his HB claim is neither from the start of the liability nor is it continuous, can you think of any reg that would allow the application of CTB for the past period?

    I don’t think I can even allow a past period DHP becasue there is no CTB entitlement.

    Seems very unfair and harsh for the customer.

    HELP!

    #111207
    Chris Robbins
    Participant

    Trina, this is a liability issue rather than a benefits one.
    You say the VOA have ‘re-banded’ as two separate properties with decision made in 2010 but backdated to 2007.
    The question is, why? What changed in 2007? Was it something that the occupier of the annexe needed to report, but failed to do so? The question is whether your claimant could reasonably have been expected to know that he should be liable for CT. It is that (presumed) failure on your claimant’s part that provides the justification for now leaving him liable for a backdated bill.
    As an aside, didn’t this ring any alarms with your benefits section when he first claimed in 2008. Didn’t his original claim specify that his annexe accommodation was completely separate from (presumably) his landlord’s and thus prompt a notification to CT that the liability issue should have been looked at then? Or were you paying HB on the basis that he actually resided in the same property as the landlord?

    #111214
    stevedaymond
    Participant

    I dont think 64(2) kicks in as the customer is liable from 2007 but was billed in 2010 so he first became liable in 2007 and did not claim within the same week.

    The other point is to check the form from early 2008. If the customer said he only wanted to claim HB then unfortunately you wont be able to use it. If he did not specify HB only and completed a form that gets used for both then you have a claim from 2008 that you have not yet made a decision on.

    #111217
    trina
    Participant

    Hi Chris

    When he claimed in 2008 the annexe was not separately banded. It does not have it’s own kitchen so we had no inkling that it should be banded. Benefits were told it was a shared kitchen.

    CT received a Disablement Relief form in 2010 from the owner,on the back of which she stated she had two kitchens- don’t know if there has always been two kitchen or if it was a new addition.. The property was referred to the VOA. They decided it should be separately banded and dated it from the start of the tenancy of our customer in 2007. VOA appeal has upheld the decision stating that a property can be banded with or without a separate kitchenin the rented area.

    HB was paid of the basis of shared accommodation having two rooms for own use.

    I have now found the original claim from 2008 which was the old DWP HB/CTB1 which does identify whether he is claiming just HB or HB/CTB. so I think I can use CTB Reg64(2) for the period 2008 -09 and now apply the CTB. Will just mess up our stats because I think I will have to use the info received date as the date we billedor CT which was last year.

    #111220
    Chris Robbins
    Participant

    You have a HB/CTB form from 2008 and, as Steve says, it can be used to make a decision if one was not made at the time.
    That of course assumes that you didn’t. Wasn’t it automatic when you got the claim (for CTB) that a decision was made to the effect that he wasn’t entitled because he had no liability?
    If you did make such a decision you have no grounds for going back and revising it now.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.