Underlying entitlement

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
  • #23254


    Private tenant in receipt of Hb on basis of Jsa ib.

    Award starts 3.7.06 and 13 week protection applies.

    We receive notification that jsa ib award ceases 3.8.06 and recommences 24.8.06.

    Hb suspended and letter sent to clt for proof of income/ capital.

    Claimant does not respond, adverse inference made and hb terminated 6.8.06.

    Hb o/p raised for period 7.8.06 to 22.10.06

    My question is this:

    When determining underlying entitlement, on the basis of the claimant’s jsa ib, for the period 28.8.06 to 22.10.06, is the eligible rent used in the determination “protected” or is it subject to the Rent officers decision?

    nb. The ROD has restricted the eligible rent.



    It will be based on what would have been their correct circumstances at the time, therefore if no restriction applies because of the 13 week protection, no restriction applies.


    Interesting one.

    As things stand, you have no option other than to assume that the claimant had enough income not to qualify for HB for about three weeks in August. That would have made any new claim from 24 August onwards a fresh business, unaffected by what had gone before. Even though the interval was brief, the earlier claim was separate. Reg 13(15) therefore does seem to apply – previous award within the last 52 weeks.

    So I think your overpayment calculation should assume that correct or “underlying” entitlement between late August and October would have been based on the LRR/CRR and not the full rent.

    Once you make that decision, the claimant will have a second bite of the cherry – if he comes back with evidence to show some residual HB entitlement during August, I think you would have to revise the overpayment calculation so that the full rent applies throughout the 13 weeks beginning in July.


    I misread that as I did not read the period in question!

    After re-reading this

    For the period 7/08/06 to 27/07/06 no restriction would apply. From 28/06/06 this would have to be calculated based on if he had made a new claim (which I guess he has not). In which case no protection applies (as there was a previous claim in 52 weeks).


    Thanks for your response

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.