Composition of Household

I am sure that I should know this but cannot find anything specific
Does a non-dependant (ie adult son) class as a member of the parents household when away at university renting a room.
The issue here is not the non-dependant deduction which would not apply because of rules and fact single disabled mum but the problem is the LHA

Client single mum (IS and DLA HR mob and MR Care) with 2 sons youngest now left school and looking for work. Oldest is at university returning most weekends and holidays. Rents rooom at university in term.

Client considers all 3 part of household in which case LHA will be on basis of 3 bed for all time etc

hi

see CH/2197/2009 where Judge Mesher holds that son at university should still have been deemed to be occupying the home with his mother for the purposes of regulation 7(13) of the Housing Benefit Regulations 2006 and goes on to state -

‘It follows from the conclusions above, especially those in paragraphs 30 to 34 about regulation 7(13), that the tribunal of 11 March 2009 erred in law by failing to ask itself whether Jacob was required to be treated as occupying the claimant’s dwelling as his home from 22 September 2008 under regulation 7(13) or (16) and (17), but instead asking itself which one dwelling he was normally occupying. If I had to ask as at 22 September 2008 which one dwelling Jacob normally occupied as his home I would have said in general terms that that was still the claimant’s house. Despite his liability to pay for his hall of residence accommodation and the focus of interests there during term time, his enduring “base” was still his mother’s home. The terms on which he, like many other students, had use of his room in the hall of residence, made it more of a temporary staging-post. It is an important part of the value of going away for further education that there is not an abrupt and complete leaving of the parental home, but a dual existence, at least at the beginning, where the student in effect has two homes. However, the tribunal was entitled in its judgment to take a different view and cannot be said to have erred in law by doing so. The error was in not considering whether the deeming provisions cut through the question of which dwelling was normally occupied.’ (paragraph 38)

here’s a link to briefcase summary -

http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/briefcase/summary/whether-student-is-to-be-treated-as-occupying-parents-home-whilst-in-halls-/

cheers ros

Thanks
Really helpful and spot on