Hello All,

I have been contacted by a Fairer Charging Officer. he has stated that some of the Adults being cared for are in receipt of the sdp in thier Income Support while others are not. the carers themselves are not in receipt of any qualifying benefits or those that are not classed as non-deps.

is there anything specific in relation to APS that means people can get the sdp despite living with another adult?

any help appreciated.

cheers

jav

Adult Placement arrangements usually do, and certainly should, include a formal licence agreement between the disabled person and the placement provider. This has two effects:
1. it means the disabled person is able to claim HB for the rent they pay to the placement provider under the licence agreement
2. it means the placement provider (and other members of their household) are not non-dependants of the disabled person (Reg.3(2A)(b), IS Regs) so that SDP is payable.

Short version - if HB is payable to the disabled person in an APS placement, so is SDP.

Richard Atkinson

When we were doing the transitional housing benefit/supporting people scheme some years ago we 'converted' many adult placements into tenancies/licences with the result that as the tenant had exclusive possession of one room (a dwelling) they were entitled to the sdp.

Thanx guys!!!!

Same experience here in Durham and we've converted over 70 placements - the commerciality is the key, establishing a separate household in the same home..

We are however having some problems with the DWP misinterpreting the regs and removing SDPs. I've found myself digging up the Bate Decision quite a few times recently to restore awards. Perhaps there's some kind of 'right payment' effort reviewing SDPs at the moment?

Be interested to know if this is happening in other areas...

Hi Fred

Not heard that happening round here yet but I've asked a social worker colleague to keep an eye out. The decision I've always found useful is Uratemp Ventures v Collins (2001) HL, where the HL found that a person could have a tenancy (and therefore exclusive possssion) of a bedroom (a hotel room in Mr Collins's case) and thus, where that is the case, they don't share a dwelling with anyone.

Regards
Paul