illegal marriage – couple or not?

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #23287
    JR
    Participant

    We have a couple who are married, but we have found that the marriage is illegal because they are step sister and brother (both sharing the same father). Mrs is receiving Income Support as a single person. DWP say they can not treat them as a couple because the marriage is illegal. Does anyone know where we stand for Housing Benefit purposes? thanks

    #11787
    Anonymous
    Guest

    The DWP’s LTAHW guidance tells us on section A1.13 who can and cannot legally be partners. This might help.

    [url]http://www.dwp.gov.uk/housingbenefit/manuals/hbgm/annex/c1annxa.pdf[/url]

    Cheers

    #11788
    Julian Hobson
    Participant

    I think there is a world of difference between treating two people as LTAHAW and the fact that they are married.

    HB definition of a Couple includes your two and so they should be treated as a couple.

    I don’t think it is the role of DWP or LA’s to decide on the legality of the marriage if that were the case then we would be presented with all sorts of difficulties.

    #11789
    Darren W
    Participant

    Regulation 2(1) gives the defention of a couple as

    (a) a man and a women who are married to each other and are members of the same household

    (b) a man and a women who are not married to each other but are living together as husband and wife

    (c) and (d) talk about same sex partners

    So in your case even if the marrage is illegal they are still living together as husband and wife so for benefit purposes they are a couple.

    #11790
    Anonymous
    Guest

    Except (b) conflicts with the definition of LTAHAW in the link provided by spencers above. Which, of course, is not legislation…is it?

    #11791
    Kevin D
    Participant

    And, as has been cited elsewhere, [b:102dec44f9]R(SB) 28/84 (para 8 )[/b:102dec44f9] rather strongly makes the point that “explanatory notes” are inadmissable for the purpose of construing law.

    Seems the LTAHAW “guidance” is yet another fine example of DWP “assistance”.

    #11792
    Anonymous
    Guest

    Before civil partnerships, gay couples were never held to be cohabiting simply because there is no such thing as gay marriage. Only a man and a woman can marry, and there is a bar to incestuous marriages, and so a brother and sister can never live as husband and wife.

    It is wrong to approach the issue as a tick sheet and the relationship must be looked at in the round (CP/8001/1995), but where there is an absolute bar to marriage it is equally true that they can not live together as husband and wife. This was held to be the case in CFC/007/1992 where it was held that a girl under sixteen was not living as husband and wife with the father of her child – simply because she was under 16 , (although Mr Commissioner Rice did also put a lot of weight onto the notion that a girl under 16 is a child for the purposes of the 1992 Act, and the definition of a married or unmarried couple is “a man and a woman……. )

    As “Mrs” gets IS as a single person, you cannot asess them as a couple in any case (See R v Housing Benefit Review Board of Penwith District Council ex p Menear QBD 11 October 1991.) If they are joint tenants, you will have to decide the most appropriate way of apportioning the rent between them. If not, then you will need to consider the matter of him being a non dependant

    #11793
    Anonymous
    Guest

    from http://www.dwp.gov.uk/housingbenefit/manuals/hbgm/annex/c1annxa.pdf

    When LTAHAW/CP is not considered
    A1.06 Potential LTAHAW/CP cannot be considered if the
    • only other people in the household are married to each other, civil partners of each other,
    or living together as if they are married or civil partners
    • customer is within a prohibited degree of relationship for marriage or civil partnership with the other person, see Prohibited Degrees later in this Annex

    See Pages 5&6 for the Prohibited Degrees.

    Cheers
    Jon

    #11794
    JR
    Participant

    thank you all for your advice.

    #11795
    Julian Hobson
    Participant

    The LTAHW stuff is not relevant here. They aren’t LTAHW they are H&W and living together in the same household.

    They are a couple for I/S purposes as much as they are for HB until such time as the marriage is annulled, we can’t possibly police the legality of marriage and neither can DWP.

    If the suggestion from DWP is that they don’t constitute one household then you could treat them as you would any other couple that have “broken up” but if they are defying the law by saying that they refuse to live apart, I think they are a couple for HB/CTB and I/S.

    #11796
    Anonymous
    Guest

    Err, if they share a father aren’t they half-brother and sister?

    If they are step-brother and sister then the DWP advice seems to say it is OK for them to be married (presumably because there is no blood relationship).

Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.