Where a clmt is not in one of the “vulnerable groups”, the LA must still identify SUITABLE alternative accommodation elsewhere (“SAA”).
However, it doesn’t have to be AVAILABLE, nor do the effects of a move on employment have to be considered (because para 4 of “old” HBR 13 isn’t engaged).
So, the consideration is down to whether or not the clmt’s gross rent charge is “unreasonably high” by comparison with EITHER the ROD or by comparision with the cost of SAA.
If the rent is unreasonably high by way of those comparisons, the rent must then be restricted by an appropriate amount. That may or may not be the same as the ROD. In exempt accommodation cases, the ROD is not binding.
The commentary in the CPAG’s HB/CTB legislation is as good a starting place as any to digest what must be considered when looking at whether alternative accommodation is “suitable” (to be found after “old” reg 13).
.
