I have refused to pay unavoidable overlapping benefit in the following situation:
Old Liability Period: 17/07/06 – 03/09/06 inclusive
New Liability Period commences 07/08/06 –
Claimant moved into new dwelling on 28/0806
The claimant is under 18 and was unable to occupy the old dwelling as he felt he was unable to manage the tenancy on his own. He never stayed in the old dwelling and never moved in any belongings. The claimant requires ongoing support which he receives at his new dwelling (Supported accommodation). Prior to these tenancies he had no rent liability.
Under Reg 7(6)(d), where a person is liable to make payments in respect of 2 dwellings s/he is treated as occupying both dwellings where:-
* only for the period after the person has moved into the new dwelling; and
* only if the liability for rent on both dwellings could be avoided; and
* only for up to four weeks.
I have read the regulations and can explain in the submission I am preparing why we can not award HB prior to the 28/08/06, the date he moved into the new dwelling.
However, I am unable to explain why I can not award unavoidable overlapping liability for the period 28/08/06 – 03/09/06. I have read CPAG 2005/06 and in the analysis (p210) it states: “Subpara (d) makes provision for HB claimants who move home and who already receive HB on the old home.” However, I can find no mention in the actual regulation that claimants must be in receipt of HB at the old home before an award can be made.
Can anyone please explain to me why claimants must be in receipt of HB at the old home before an award of unavoidable overlapping liability can be made? Please quote any regulation case/law.
Any help would be appreciated-thank you
.
