Four or Five weeks

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #19683
    seanosul
    Participant

    Claimant moves into a property on 9 December 2004. He claims on January 4 2005. Is this the 4th or 5th week for the purposes of making a brand new claim within 4 weeks?

    #629
    markp
    Participant

    I make just under the 28 days so I’d pay.

    Do I know what I'm doing? The jury's out on that........................

    #630
    Kevin D
    Participant

    Not sure of the relevance of the “4th” / “5th” week issue.

    The following assumes that the clmt’s liability commenced, for the first time, on the same day as occupancy. Also, assumed to be working age claim.

    If the clmt is on IS / JSA(IB) etc, the claim date is the date liability started, as the HB claim was made within 28 days of that date.

    If the clmt submits a “std” claim, HB starts from the Monday following 4th Jan 2005.

    In both cases, the old (and now defunct) 4 week linking rule to any previous claim is irrelevant.

    Regards

    #631
    david farrar
    Participant

    I am a bit uncertain of the question.

    Which regulation are you considering applying?

    E.g. If liability is weekly beginning on Monday and liability commenced on 6 December 2004.
    Claim received on 4 January 2005 is within 4 weeks of move in date but not within 4 weeks of liability unless treated as ‘on the mat’ claim. remember 3 January 2005 was a Bank Holiday.

    However it may be relevant to consider dates of council office christmas closure.

    #632
    Anonymous
    Guest

    Are you reasoning that it’s a weekly tenancy, so HB would be paid at a full week’s rate for the week of 9 December, making the start date 6 December for all practical purposes, and the claim date is just outside 28 days from the 6th?

    I think that conflates two processes. The first question is whether the claim was made within 28 days of the day on which liability started in real life – and it was (4 Jan being the 27th day if we assume that 9 December was also the first day of the tenancy). That satisfies Reg 72.

    Next, the amount of HB in the first week is calculated by reference to a whole week, but by this stage you have already established that he will be entitled from that week so the 28 day rule is no longer relevant. It’s now as if he really did claim on the 9th.

    So in the terms of your poll question, I vote 4th week

    #633
    seanosul
    Participant

    Reg 72 does not say 28 days it says four weeks

    (bb) in a case where a claimant or his partner is a person on income support or an income-based jobseeker’s allowance and he becomes liable for the first time to make payments in respect of the dwelling which he occupies as his home, where the claim is received at the designated office or appropriate DWP office within 4 weeks of the claimant first becoming liable for such payments, the date he became liable for those payments;

    So what is four weeks? Four benefit weeks or 28 days?

    #634
    david farrar
    Participant

    [i:ccf9abbbee]So what is four weeks? Four benefit weeks or 28 days?[/i:ccf9abbbee]

    As the Regulation does not state 4 [b:ccf9abbbee]benefit[/b:ccf9abbbee] weeks, then 4 weeks should be given its normal everyday meaning of 28 days.

    You still have not confirmed the frequency of the liability or start date of liability.

    #635
    seanosul
    Participant

    The tenancy is weekly. Does this make a difference?

    There is no linking rule as this a brand new claim for benefit.

    #636
    Kevin D
    Participant

    Sean:

    I agree with David Farrar’s view on the distinction between 4 weeks and 4 benefit weeks.

    Peter B more or less covers the further separation of distinguishing [u:27d29f10ea]claim[/u:27d29f10ea] dates from [u:27d29f10ea]start[/u:27d29f10ea] dates.

    The first step is to establish the claim date (normally HBR 72(5)).

    Once the claim date is established, next up is the start date – HBR 65 (paras 1 or 2 as appropriate).

    Finally, the issue of “weekly” or “daily” liability – HBR 69.

    As a technical aside, HBR 65 means ALL HB claims start from a Monday. The effect (or illusion) of the “midweek” start date for “daily” liabilities is given by HBR 69.

    Hope this helps.

    #637
    seanosul
    Participant

    😈 😈 Twenty votes for 4 weeks. 2 Votes for 5 weeks. Less than 1 percent of the electorate say four weeks therefore using old stock transfer ballot rules 5 weeks wins 😈 😈

    #638
    Anonymous
    Guest

    My opinion…

    If tenancy start date is 9 December 2004 (first day of new liability) and claim date is 4 January 2005 and claimant is in recipt of IS/JSA(IB)…then I would treat date of claim as 9 December 2004 as per reg 72(5)(bb).

    9 December 2004 is a Wednesday and rent liability is on a weekly basis means that HB would be awarded from 6 December 2004 as per reg 65 (1) and (2).

    As an aside…I have always interpreted 4 weeks as 28 days. Regs do not mention 4 weeks as 4 ‘benefit’ weeks in this matter.

    #639
    Anonymous
    Guest

    what’s going on?

    #640
    Anonymous
    Guest

    Sean, 300+ views, 29 votes, what does this tell us?

    #641
    david farrar
    Participant

    [quote:e8d21ce18a=”Masked Assessor”]Sean, 300+ views, 29 votes, what does this tell us?[/quote:e8d21ce18a]

    Possibly that some people have viewed more than once?

    Or alternatively, some people do not have enough information to answer the question.

    In my opinion, it would depend upon date liability actually began.

    And I cannot find that information anywhere on the thread.

    #642
    Kevin D
    Participant

    David…

    Be fair – my first post on this thread did point out that the reply was based on an assumption about the date of liability….. 🙂 As for the rest of the response, well, I just guessed….

    And I’ve only viewed this thread 145 times. So far…..

    Regards

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.