Is DLA counted as income for the purposes of calculation to entitlement to DHP's. I checked the Housing Benefit Guidance Manual and is seems to suggest that DLA mobility component is exempt but doesnt mention the care component. Does this meant hat the care component is counted as income?

There isn’t a “calculation to entitlement” to a DHP in the usual sense.

If someone is entitled to HB or CTB then they are eligible to be considered for a DHP.

After that, the basis on which an LA can choose to award, or not to award, a DHP is not directly linked to income, but to the totality of the claimant’s circumstances.

DHPs are discretionary and it's up to the LA how they decide whether to pay and how much to pay. They have to look at each individual claimant's circs and a policy of always taking either component of DLA into account would probably be unlawful fettering of their discretion, and challengable by judicial review.
However, a policy of never taking DLA into account would probably be equally unlawful, although I can't see anyone challenging such a policy!

As others have said, there is no means test as such. Section 73(14) of the C&B Act precludes taking DLAMC into account "in applying any enactment or instrument under which regard is to be had to a person's means", although this provision would strictly not apply to any additional means test carried out for DHP purposes since it would be an extra-statutory test.

I believe that it would be highly arguable that to refuse a DHP on the ground that a claimant could use their DLA to meet the shortfall would be challengeable on judicial review grounds, since the two components are meant to pay for additional care and mobility expenses and not housing costs.


DISCLAIMER: The above is a general contribution to the subject under discussion. It is not intended to be relied upon as legal advice. Any person requiring advice on an identical or similar issue should consult a solicitor or lay adviser with expertise in welfare rights law.

Paul, but what about Turner v Barnet LBC QBD EWHC Admin 204 CO/1630/99. It was held in that case that it was perfectly acceptable for DLAC to be used to fund the additional costs incurred by a disabled person needing larger accommodation when an LA considered an application for a EHP (the forerunner to DHP's).

"<32> In this case, as it seems to me, the claimants have chosen to live in their present accommodation because it gives them extra space and meets their requirements in other respects (as regards adaptations, dogs, etc). All that is entirely understandable. If one leaves aside any question of housing benefit, I see nothing wrong with a recipient of the care component using part of it by way of payment of rent for larger and more suitable accommodation than he would otherwise be able to afford. But equally, if the resulting rent is higher than will be met by a normal payment of housing benefit, I see nothing wrong in principle with taking the care component into account when determining whether the person concerned can afford to live in the chosen property or will suffer exceptional hardship. That is not to say that the care component can always be said to be available for that purpose. Everything depends on individual circumstances. What it does mean, however, is that an authority is not precluded as a matter of law from taking the care component into account. To take it into account cannot be said to frustrate the purposes for which disability living allowance is paid or otherwise to run counter to the statutory regime.".

On what basis do you consider that an application for JR might be successful?

The above case refers to a scenario where the property is larger than normal because of the medical condition. However, here in East Anglia rents in general have gone up rapidly over the past couple of years, (to quite high levels) whilst the rent officer's idea of a fair rent have not not kept up.

Take a hyperthetical situation therefore of two claimants in similar circumstances: both renting property of similar size and cost, one client with DLA and one without, both applying for a DHP to help make up a similar difference in rent due to a RO's determination.
If an award is made to the latter client, but not the former, should the claimant on DLA be penalised because that extra income is being taken into account?

What about cases where the extra room needed by the disabled person is for a carer? DLA is not sufficient to meet both the cost of the rent-restricted accommodation AND the payment of carers AND other expenses arising from disability.

DLA is clearly intended for the 'personal' needs of a disabled person as a consequence of thier disability. I agree with Paul, it should be expected to be used for housing costs.

....that must by what the preview button is for....

last line should read: "...it should NOT be expected to be used..."