Tue 27-Jul-04 09:03 PM by shawn

HI Everyone! Could somebody answer me? In order to qualify for backdated H/CT benefits my client must be liable for rent.So the agreement is between her and her friends says " WE are -(names of the friends) tacking responsibility for paying your ( name of my clt.) rent from the date ( date agreed) in amount between 150Ј to 200Ј per week, only under condition that you are ( name of my clt.) obliged to repay any amount to build up for the period of time we are (friend's names) and yourself (clt.-s name) agreed.You are (my clt. name)must repay this amount in full after you receive your status documents plus 3 to 6 months for you to settle down. After the period of 6 month if we are(Friend's names) not starting to receive the repayment from you ( my clt.'s name) can take the legal action against you which you ( clt. name) aware and agreed to.Repayments should be made gradually, in any comfortable and available to yourself way.
Date and signatures of both sides.
The question is - does this look as an appropriate agreement to you,can it be used as liability for rent and to backdate the HB/CTB ,and can i use it in court to argue my clt.'s entitlement for backdating benefits?
Any thoughts,opinions and replays will be highly appreciated.
Yours Erika V.F.

It might work, but I suspect the local authority is likely to either regard this sort of agreement as created to take advantage of the HB scheme, or alternatively may conclude that no real liability exists for your client. As far as I can make out, you are trying to create a situation where a person is liable for rent but is not discharging it - his/her friends are. How are you going to convince a local authority or a court that a liability exists months later when the rent has been paid by other tenants?

Also what reasons are you going to advance for this arrangement being set up other than to obtain HB?

You may have an arguable case for both, but I reckon the outcome is not certain, nor is it likely to be very quick!

But then there may be people out there with the necessary caselaw to shoot me down in flames...............

The liability is between the claimant and the landlord. The fact that a third party discharges that liability in the absence of HB payments is not relvant to entitlement to HB.

This was confirmed in CH/3579/2003 in a similar case where Social Services picked up the tab.

I would not bother with a formal agreement between the friends but simply get a statement to the effect that the money was lent to the claimant to pay the rent pending the housing benefit claim being decided