Entitlement Prior To Occupation

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • Author
  • #23481

    Hello Folks,

    Just wondering if anyone can confirm what is correct in the following-

    We have an ongoing HB claim from a pensioner who has recently moved house. His tenancies at the new and old addresses overlap. He did not move house when the new tenancy began- instead he did not move until the end date of the tenancy on the old address (ie a month into the new tenancy).

    He has requested that we cover HB on both properties. He has also provided evidence he was waiting on a social fund loan to help with the move.

    Should he be entitled to ANY payment on the 2 homes?

    I don’t think he should be because-

    – the fact that he did not move straight away stops him getting an overlap for the 2 homes, and

    – he can’t get “HB prior to occupation” because, although he fulfills the other criteria (Pensioner, waiting on a social fund loan), this rule specifically does not allow HB on the old address AND the new address. (ie the fact that he is already getting HB at the old address discounts him, whereas if he were a brand new claimant he would get this).

    I’m i correct in this- or would other folk award him “HB prior to occupation”?

    Any advice would be gratefully received.


    I think he can only be treated as occupying both if he can be treated as occupying the new dwelling.

    He can only be treated as occupyng it if the delay in him moving is that he is awaiting adaptations to the new property in respect of his or a member of his family’s disability.

    Kevin D

    HBR(SPC) 7(6)(d) allows HB on two homes if the move was immediate.

    However, in your case, HB can only be allowed on two homes if [b:b916f88587]HBR(SPC) 7(6)(e)[/b:b916f88587] is satisfied.

    For this, the delay in moving MUST have been [b:b916f88587]”….necessary in order to adapt the dwelling to meet the disablement needs of that person or any member of his family….[/b:b916f88587]”.

    If the clmt is unable to meet that requirement, no dual HB is payable in your case.



    Thanks for your replies folks-

    That is pretty much what i thought.

    There is no suggestion of alterations to the new property. So it looks like we all agree that no HB is due. It still seems a wee bit unfair on the poor old fella though……… but rules is rules i suppose.



    HB payments are applicable prior to moving in if:

    the claimant had to await property adaptaions to suit their or a member of their families diablement prior to moving in.

    was awaiting a social fund payment to help with the move AND is aged 60 or more or has a child under 6, or someone in the family is entitled to a disability premium.

    They are waiting to t leave hospital or a care home.

    In all cases the award can only be made after they have moved in, the delay in moving in was reasonable and the application for double rent was made promptly after moving in.

    the fact he was awaiting the social fund loan would be sufficient reason to allow the claim had he not not already been receiving HB for the old address so you absolutely right! He doesnt get squatt…

    shame though

    Kevin D

    I disagree with part of Stewart’s post [Edit: Or have I misunderstood?].

    Where there is dual liability and there is a delay in moving, HB can only be paid on 2-homes if the delay was [b:8cce1ed48a]”….necessary in order to adapt the dwelling to meet the disablement needs of that person or any member of his family….[/b:8cce1ed48a]”.

    In 2-homes cases, the other two issues (i.e. social fund / care home &/or hospital) make no difference.



    Kevin I may be mistaken but as I understand it the 2 homes rule relates to the payment of rent liability on the former home having moved into the new property – usually the notice period for the former tenancy.

    That was not the case stated in the query, in the case given the claimant was seeking HB on the new property prior to moving in which is not dealt with by the 2 homes rule.

    Again as I understand it HB for a period prior to moving in can only be granted in the circumstances lists in my prior post.


    Kevin D

    Hi Stewart,

    I agree that dual HB can only be considered once a clmt has actually moved. But, there are two very separate and distinct provisions in this situation. These cover:

    [b:ad95029765]1) the clmt moves into the “new” property promptly – no delay.[/b:ad95029765]

    In this scenario, [b:ad95029765]HBR 7(6)(d)[/b:ad95029765] applies.

    2) [b:ad95029765]the clmt moves into the new property, but there is a delay and the move is after liability has commenced[/b:ad95029765].

    In this scenario, [b:ad95029765]HBR 7(6)[u:ad95029765](e)[/u:ad95029765][/b:ad95029765] applies.

    My understanding of the original post is that it is the second scenario that has occurred. If so, the effect of HBR 7(6)(e) is that issues relating to Social Fund / hospital etc make no difference. The only time where those issues count are where only one home is being considered for HB ([b:ad95029765]HBR 7(8 )[/b:ad95029765] then applies)

    [b:ad95029765]HBR 7: u-60[/b:ad95029765]: new.hbinfo.org.com/menu2/hbregs06/007_06.shtml
    [b:ad95029765]HBR 7: o-60[/b:ad95029765]: new.hbinfo.org.com/menu2/pchbregs06/pchbindex06.htm

    Hope that makes sense.


Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.