Exempt Accomodation – Vulnerability question

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
  • #32006


    We have a case where we believe that the tenant is not vulnerable (he is working) As we do not believe he meets the vulnerable criteria are we correct in assuming that we do not have to look into suitable alternative accom & can use the Rent Officer decision?

    Any caselaw would be appreciated

    Thanks in advance

    Kevin D

    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).


    Thanks Kevin!!!


    The only rider I’d add is that vulnerability and employment aren’t mutually exclusive. Is it supported employment, voluntary or therapeutic work?

    Vulnerable people, including those with physical and mental disabilities, quite often do want to work and there’s no shortage of support available to help them through it. That doesn’t stop them from continuing to be vulnerable though…

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.