rent being partially paid

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
  • #28545

    …any advice gratefully received for the following scenario ; specifically, can I take the 300.00 payment towards the rent into account, for the Benefit calculation ? 20 years old ; working ; on a low wage ;
    the rent is £700.00 pcm ;
    clt.also has a 21 non-dependant resident, on JSA ; sole tenant ; there’s no mention of non-dep on tenancy agreement ;
    however, non-dep’s mum contributes £300.00 to the rent, via direct debit to the landlord (proof received)

    can I take this £300.00 into account in the Benefit calculation ?

    if I don’t, the net result in this instance would be a payment of c.700.00 per month to the clt., leaving her 300.00 per month free, to spend as she wishes !!

    …surely not the purpose of HB…

    Kevin D

    A couple of questions:

    1) Is the money paid to the non-dep, or to the clmt?

    If to the non-dep, it isn’t the clmt’s income. And, if the non-dep is not working 16+ hours per week, it won’t affect the non-dep deduction.

    If the money is paid to the clmt, then a further question arises:

    2) Is there any obligation for the £300?

    If not, the payments would appear to be voluntary and, as such, would be disregarded in full.

    Hope this helps.

    Trevor Kenward

    It would seem that it cannot be treated as clmts income as it would appear such an amount is being paid on behalf of the non-dep.
    I would ask the intention of such an arrangement . ie is it in effect the non deps proportion of the rent even though not formalised on a joint tenant basis?
    Will such an arrangement cease if the non-dep starts work?


    Is the 21 year old not on the tenancy agreement actually a non-dep, or is he in reality a sub-tenant?


    As the “rent” of £300 is being paid via “direct debit to the landlord” then I think it is a reasonable inference to believe that there is at least an oral contract between the non-dep and the landlord and pay HB on the £400 remaining. That leaves the issue of whether to take a non-dep deduction … logic suggests no but I am still thinking on that one ….


    If there is a written agreement giving the claimant exclusive possession of the whole property for the full rent, I think that is a hefty factor counting against the inference that there is a separate de facto tenancy between the landlord and the putative non-dep.

    If you do decide to go along with the view that there is actually a separate oral tenancy between the non-dep and the landlord, and that the claimant’s true rent liability is therefore reduced accordingly, Reg 3 would not expressly rule out the applkication of a non-dep deduction when the person reaches age 25 or comes off JSA, but it is surely absurd to double-count: otherwise, in any house-share arrangement where the occupiers have indivual tenancy agreements but there is a shared living room or kitchen you could argue that everyone is everyone else’s non-dep! The only sensible interpretation is to say that the categories of non-dep and fellow HMO tenant are mutually exclusive.

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.