non self contained to self contained – LHJA (again..)

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #37860
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I have a claimant who was sharing a property with a joint tenant and therefore the claim was calculated as not self contained. The joint tenant has moved out and so from 1st April (unfortunate date for the change…), the claimant and his family have sole use of the house (self contained).
    The room entitlement hasn’t changed, just the self contained bit – if I’m reading the guidance correctly, this poor claimant doesn’t get any protection because his change doesn’t fall into one of the “trigger” categories – is this right or have I got the completely wrong end of the stick? :~

    #106561
    peterdelamothe
    Keymaster

    Is this not just a move from the shared rate to one or more bedroom rate and therfore a change in size criteria? As it occurred on 1 April 2011, the claimant gets the better buy of the higher rate or the old rate protected?

    #106569
    Anonymous
    Guest

    It sounds as if the claimant has children, so I am guessing this change has not altered his dwelling category at all. He has found himself responsible for the full rent rather than just a share as before, but the Council is struggling to find an LHA trigger event to justify re-apportioning the rent 100% in his favour. So not really a transitional protection issue.

    Have I read that right? If so, this is one of the situations that HBINFO flagged up in late 2007/early 2008 as requiring attention: DWP was most insistent that any change in personal rent liability during the LHA year cannot be a reason in itself for a fresh LHA determination.

    #106571
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Hi Peter – yes the claimant and partner have children so the size criteria hasn’t changed just the shared liability

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