Client is going abroad for six weeks on holiday. She is on I/S (single mother). Her I/S will stop as going for more than 4 weeks. She is entitled to be away for up to 13 weeks for HB purposes, but I am concerned HB will cease once I/S stops. What evidence should she present to prevent this happening?

Not sure you can prevent HB stopping. The LA is obliged to
stop the claim, enquire if income other than IS is being received (used to be called inviting an in work claim).

In the case of going abroad - evidence that the claimant has returned and when (which in practical terms cannot be done until after the holiday) and also evidence that the claimant did not receive any income whilst abroad.

Although Derek_s is generally correct, there is absolutely no reason why the claimant cannot just send the LA in advance of the holiday a letter explaining that she is going on holiday. The letter will need to give the dates of the holiday and detail her income (Child Benefit etc) and any Capital she has. She will also need to supply the necessary evidence of these. If she does that there is no reason why the LA need stop the claim.

With enough notice and the right information to the LA, it ought to be possible for HB to continue seamlessly throughout the absence. Your client needs to report the fact that she is going TO THE LA as soon as possible. If she relies on DWP to do it they will simply notify the LA that IS has ended because she is abroad and her HB will stop. But if she tells the LA they should be able to resolve matters without stopping her benefit. The information they need is length of absence and her undertaking that it will not exceed 13 weeks, details of income in that period or a statement that there won't be any. LA may also require proof that she will still be liable for the rent and the property is not going to be let to anyone else during the period, although arguably they ought to be able to infer this without any more proof that they already have concerning her residence and tenancy.

None of this needs to wait until she comes back

I only wish such positive approaches of Jmembury and Any Richards were more common.

The LA's I deal with however would point out that saying you are going on holiday, how long and what income you wil or will not get is simply expressing an intention. This in no way will satisfy a coherent verification process.

I have some difficulty in believing that their LA's will willingly pay or continue to pay HB simply on the basis of expressed intention. It's a very nice idea but I could not in all honesty advise any claimant to expect payment before documentary proofs are provided.

But there is no basis for the approach of asking people to detail their circumstance "post-hoc", as it were.

Let's take the "going abroad" element out of this scenario. If someone comes off IS they would detail what their circumstances now are and there would then be a supersession of their HB/CTB based on these new circumstances. No LA could justify making the person come back in six weeks' time and detail what their circs WERE in the preceding six weeks before reassessing their claim!

Getting back to the case in point, the material change is the ending of IS - the fact that the person is going abroad for a few weeks (less than 13) is not, in my view a material fact at all if the dwelling remains the normal home, the rent liability remains, there is no letting of the property to anyone else, and there is a stated intention to return within 13 weeks which the LA has no reason to doubt. All this is perfectly straightforward to establish with enough notice.

Any LA which effectively requires a claimant to return from their absence before judging its length, before judging the claimant's intentions to return, and before actually assessing their benefit is guilty of maladministration, unless they can show that there was a genuine question of entitlement which could not have been resolved before the person's return. And in any case, how do you "prove" that you had no income in a given period, and why would the statement "I did not have any income in past 6 weeks" carry any more weight than the statement "I will not have any income in the next 6 weeks"?

OK, so it doesn't always work like this. My point is that there is no legitimate reason why it shouldn't.

As far as I am aware my LA adopts this approach as far as it is able. Where it falls down is where there is no contact from the claimant and we simply get an "end-of" notification with "abroad" written on it.

I'll shut up now......

Unfortunately Andy your approach only holds up for a temporary absence issue. Evidence of intention to return should obvoiusly be accepted and benefit should continue until a material change occurs.

But you are ignoring the practicalities of this scenario. There is a material change - ending IS occurs. So, what HB can continue to be paid to a temporary absent claimant? Will an assessor really continue full HB on a previous stated intention there is no income? Surely there would need to be at least questions asked before the level of HB award can be calculated. Everybody else whose IS stops has to answer these questions.

And if the claimant is not present to answer the questions I would expect no decision until they respond or time limits expire.

There is a distinction between intention and fact. Intention is not normally useful except in temporary absence cases. Most other HB issues do not accept intention as proof. The obvious example is "I am moving into my new home next Monday" - which will not be accepted as proof to determine start of HB award whereas "I moved in last Monday" will be acceptable. The latter is a statement of fact which does carry more weight than a statement of intention.

Derek, I agree that the practicalities are where it often falls down, but I still maintain (speaking purely about my own LA here) that it is possible to sort all the questions out before the claimant's departure and keep HB running.

Just a point that may not have been considered - the end of IS no longer results in an automatic ending of the HB - the circumstances where this is the case are set out in regulation 65A of the HB (Gen) Regs which in practical effect says that the IS ended because of employment - so the fact that someone goes abroad and that results in IS ending should not result in the HB claim being cancelled.

I am with AndyRichards and Shabir here. Almost all claims for people in work are based upon an estimate of what their income will be over the next few weeks and months. The claimant then has to notify you if there was a change in those circumstances.

You can apply exactly the same principal here. Base the claim on an estimate of claimant’s income whilst on holiday, then claimant must tell you if there is a material change.

Derek_S asks – “There is a material change - ending IS occurs. So, what HB can continue to be paid to a temporary absent claimant? Will an assessor really continue full HB on a previous stated intention there is no income?”

If a claimant was on IS and came in to tell you that they would be starting work shortly and provided you with evidence of what their income would be, their capital etc you would not ask them to go away and wait until their IS actually ceased and then come back again with all the same stuff. (At least I hope not) You would use the evidence as a basis for a re-assessment and ask them to let you know if there was a change.

There is a material change, in that her IS will stop, but as long as she advises the LA of what income, if any, she will have at that point, it shouldn't prevent her from claiming HB. My experience of making nil income claims is that the client will usually be asked how they are living day-to-day with no income, but as long as they give some sort of reasonable explanation (along with any corroborative evidence they ask for)it isn't a problem. In this case she has presumably already saved for and paid for her holiday, or will be staying with relatives who will be paying for most of her living expenses, or whatever; this should be a perfectly adequate explanation. It's a seperate issue to the temporary absence, but it isn't a problem in itself. As for the fact that she'll be notifying them in advance, most LAs spend half their time chasing around after information that claimants haven't given them, so they can hardly complain when someone gives them the details in advance!