A client moved out of one of our projects before their notice period was up. A support worker reported the move out date as a change of circumstances and the HB stopped leaving a couple of hundred pounds arrears. The client was liable for rent up until the notice ran out. Is there an argument that the HB should continue until the end of the notice period i.e. after he actually moved out?

NB normally our clients move into rented accommodation and therefore claim for HB on their new home. Dual Hb is applied for if necessary so that the notice period is covered. In this case, the client has moved home to his parents house so no HB.

Regulation 7(7) of the HOusing Benefit Regulations 2006:

"Where -
(a) a person has moved into a dwelling for which he is not liable to make payments ("the new dwelling"); and
(b) immediately before that move, he was liable to make payments for the dwelling he previously occupied as his hoome ("the former dwelling"); and
(c) that liability continues after he has moved into the new dwelling.

he shall be treated as occupying the former dwelling as his home for a period not exceeding 4 benefit weeks if he could not reasonably have avoided liability in respect of that former dwelling."

So, the short answer is yes, HB can continue until the end of the 4 week notice period. The longer answer depends on whyhe moved, and whether moving before the end of the 4 week notice period was "reasonable".

Out of interest, would the ex-resident need to sign a request for HB to be awarded for the period after he/she had left, or can this be requested by the landlord?

Yes - because it is the ex residents claim.
Housing benefit then need to decide if it is "unavoidable" for the tenant to pay rent for that period. So tenant needs a confirmation letter from the landlord that the tenant must give the notice period and pay rent for it.
This letter then need to be sent to housing benefit.

Why did the ex resident move out so quickly is clearly relevant for hb to be able to make the decision. Was it "unavoidable"?

I bet there will be an overpayment letter from housing benefit in the post too if they have already paid the housing benefit for that time

Legally, neither - the Reg. says that the claimant SHALL be treated as occupying the formewr dwelling as his home etc.

Therefore, it should be enough that the authority is made aware that the conditions are met - it is irrelevant who makes the authority aware.

Hmmmm....a difference of opinion it seems. If the LA only require notification by the landlord (and nothing signed by the ex-resident) this could make a big difference, especially in the supported housing sector. Some chunky HB losses could be minimised in cases of abandonment.

Any thoughts?

I half agree with Bob - no "application" is required.

However, in my view (& very much depending on the already known circumstances), the LA could make a case that further info is needed from the CLMT. As Penny pointed out, the crux is whether or not the liability is unavoidable (reasonably etc) and it is often only the clmt who will be able to provide the necessary info for that factor.

Obviously, if the LA is happy with the info from the L/L (or any other source for that matter), I agree with Bob that payment should be made if the conditions are known to be satisfied.

Regards