You are here
>
Home
> Search decisions database
Decision Summary Information
Back to Results
|
Search Again
|
Most Recent Decisions
Neutral Citation Number:
Reported Number:
R(H)4/09
File Number:
CH 779 2007
Appellant:
Respondent:
Judge/Commissioner:
Judge C. Turnbull
Date Of Decision:
28/07/2008
Date Added:
01/09/2008
Main Category:
Housing and council tax benefits
Main Subcategory:
non-dependants
Secondary Category:
Secondary Subcategory:
Notes:
Housing benefit – rent restrictions – exemption where housing-related support provided – relevance of support available to tenants generally but not taken advantage of by the claimant (Paragraphs 1 to 30 and 226 to 267 only are reproduced.) The four claimants were tenants of Golden Lane Housing Limited (GLH), who provided accommodation for people with learning disabilities throughout the country. They were in receipt of housing benefit. Following the introduction of the Supporting People programme in 2003, the local authority restricted the eligible rent to the local reference rent, determined by a rent officer, applying the version of regulation 11 of the Housing Benefit (General) Regulations 1987 in force since 2 January 1996. The claimants argued on appeal that their accommodation was exempt by virtue of the saving provision in regulation 10 of the Housing Benefit (General) Amendment Regulations 1995. Regulation 10(6), as amended in 1999, defines exempt accommodation as including accommodation provided by certain bodies where the landlord or a person acting on its behalf also provides the claimant with care, support or supervision. (Equivalent provisions, referred to in paragraph 4 of the decision, are contained in the consolidating legislation which took effect from 6 March 2006.) Since April 2003 care support and supervision had been provided by third parties commissioned directly by the local authority. The Commissioner had by interim decisions previously set aside the appeal tribunals’ decisions and reheard the evidence for the propose of making decisions in substitution for those made by the appeal tribunals. Held, dismissing the appeals, that: 1. the making available of certain types of support is capable of amounting to the provision of support to a tenant during a particular period, even if that tenant has no need of it during that period, but in determining whether a service or facility amounts to the provision of support to any particular tenant to a more than minimal extent, one must have regard to the degree of likelihood that the particular tenant will ever need to take advantage of it (paragraphs 21 to 24); 2. further, the service or facility which is made available must be one which can and may realistically be called upon at any time. On the facts of these cases GLH did not provide support by being ready and willing (i) to intervene in the event of something going badly wrong with the support being provided by the main support provider (paragraphs 230) or (ii) to assist the tenant with finding new accommodation should he decide to move (paragraph 261); 3. the provision of “support” involves the landlord doing something more than or different from the exercise of its ordinary property management functions (paragraph 25); 4. the words “provides … support” imply a degree of continuity in the available support. They therefore do not include assistance given by the landlord in connection with the tenant’s move to the property (paragraphs 26 and 261); 5. the word “support” connotes the giving of advice and assistance to the claimant in coping with the practicalities of everyday life, and does not extend to scrutinising the arrangements for the provision by some other body of care, support and supervision, with a view to remedying defects or to recommending improvements (paragraph 232); 6. in relation to the each of the categories of support said by GLH to have been provided, either GLH did not at the material times provide support, or did not do so to more than a minimal extent, and the aggregate of the support provided was not more than minimal (paragraphs 265 to 267).
Decision(s) to Download:
CH 779 2007 amended.doc
R(H) 4-09 bv.doc
Download
Adobe Reader
|