Terms & Conditions

[ann_i]

I have got a situation where JSA(IB) are treating a couple as joint claimants. Mr rents a one bedroomed Housing Association Flat and his partner rents a private 2 bed flat close by. The landlady of the partner will not under any circumstances allow MR to move in with her and her 2 children. Mr has only a one-bed flat and they cannot move in with him.

In this unusual senario would I be able to award benefit on two homes?

NB – they are waiting for the Housing association to re-house them as a family.

[Anonymous]

Did the HA place the partner in the privately rented accommodation?

[ann_i]

No unfortunately – they are just a couple who have got together and had their own homes prior to starting a relationship

[Anonymous]

In that case I don’t think you can use the two homes provision in reg 7 of the HBR 2006

[ann_i]

Thank you Andy for your prompt reply. Can you think of any other way around paying for the both homes for this couple. They are after all still individually occupying both homes still have their own liability for both homes?

[Anonymous]

They aren’t a couple

[Anonymous]

That’s my thought too, but the joint JSA(IB) award makes things a bit sticky, no?

[Anonymous]

I don’t think so. The key cases are Menear and R(H) 9/04.

In Menear, the Council wanted to treat two people as a couple; one of them had capital from the proceeds of selling his house and the other was on IS. The Council decided that the couple had capital in excess of the limit for HB and disallowed the claim. Mrs Menear won the appeal on a very limited technicality:- the Council was entitled to treat them as a couple, and it was correct to aggregate all their income and capital, but the structure of the HB Regs meant that all the aggregated capital fell to be disregarded because she was on IS. The principle does not work in reverse. This was confirmed in R(H) 9/04 – the claimant and his ex-wife had been treated as a couple for JSA purposes, but the Council was free to decide that they were not a couple.

On the facts described here, the definition of couple in s137 of the Conts and Bens Act seems to fall at the first hurdle – they aren’t part of the same household. They may or may not want to challenge the JSA decision, but that needn’t worry the Council: the Council should make its own s137 decision

[Author]

Posts