Cl. HB paid direct to landlord, with top up direct from tenant. For various reasons this caused overpayment to landlord. Tenancy was coming to an end. Tenant asked LA to make future payments direct to her. Was apparently told they needed written evidence of the overpayment to landlord. Later, LA said they could not change to paying tenant without landlord's agreement. Is this correct?

I have tried to check with HB Regs. 2006. I'm missing something because all I can find is Part 12, which seems to cover only payments of "rent allowance" - which I assume is LHA, although I can't find a definition of it.

Can anyone please clarify for me whether the LA should simply accept the tenant's request for payment to her & if not what their rights/powers are; also please point me to the relevant Reg. (or does Part 12 actually apply to HB as well as rent allowance?)

Due to the fact that there is a "top up" it looks very much like this is LHA.

Assuming it is LHA, the only way that the LA can be paying the landlord is if a decision has been made that the tenant is "unable or unlikely" to pay their rent if paid direct.

If the LA has decided that this is the case it is perhaps not surprising that they want some assurance that what the tenant is saying is correct before switching payments.

If they were to decide to switch payment to tenant then the landlord would have to be notified and would have the right of appeal.

Jeff

Sorry - I should have made it clear. This is HB, not LHA. The top-ups are because of NDDs. Does that alter the position please? Does your last para. apply to HB as well as LHA?

Yes, if not LHA then the claimant can choose to have payments made to themselves.

The landlord would still have to be notified and would have the right of appeal.

Jeff

Jeff

Many thanks. Am I right to assume that, if the LA has to notify the landlord & give them a chance to appeal, they can suspend payment until that has been done?

Can you tell me please whether there are any Regs. covering this, & if so what they are - I haven't been able to find anything.

You are looking at Regs 95 and 96 of the HB Regs 2006.

To a certain extent it will depend upon which of these regs were being used to pay the Landlord in the first place.

If It was just a claimant's request under regulation 96, then I would expect the LA to just switch the payment to the claimant and notify the Landlord with appeal rights. In these cases I would not normally expect the LA to delay making the change or seek further information unless the landlord has previously informed the LA that the tenant is 8 weeks in arrears or simular.

If it was under reg 95 (normally the claimant is 8 weeks or more in arrears) then I would expect the LA to require evidence from the claimant that they are no longer in arrears before payment is switched. Again the LA should notify the Landlord and give appeal rights.

I don't think the LA can suspend payments as there does not appear to be a question over continuing entitlement, only over who the payment is to be made to.