Hello all

We have a very good relationship with some of the benefit administrators at our City LA - they automatically send letters directly to us advising if further info has been requested of our residents. This allows us to support them and to act quickly if problems arise.

However, some administrators at the City LA (and most of the smaller County LAs) do not send us letters informing of further info requests. We are told there is no legal requirement to send letters to us. They also use the the data protection argument. Letters sent only to residents can be lost/binned which can lead to arrears building up, and the need for time-consuming backdating requests/appeals (often the basis of appeal will be support needs, and us not being aware of info requests!!).

We currently get our residents to submit an Authority to Disclose form which states that the claimant authorises our staff to 'obtain information' on the claim. I was wondering, if we asked our residents to sign a form specifically requesting that the LA copy any further info request letters to us, would the LA be bound by this?

Thanks all

LD

In my view, the LA are not bound by any general authorisation. Strictly speaking, the LA are correct to write directly to the clmt, unless HBR 82 applies (i.e. appointees (as formally accepted by the LA) / Power of Attorney / Guardians).

There are also one or two CDs around in backdate & overpayment cases which make it clear that "clmt" absolutely means "clmt" unless HBR 82 applies.

In addition, HBR 86(1) makes clear reference to "....a person who makes a claim, or a person to whom housing benefit has been awarded, shall furnish such certificates, documents, information and evidence in connection with the claim...." etc. In my view, that rules out a third party unless that third party is covered by HBR 82.

However, I see nothing to prevent an LA from sending COPIES of letters to 3rd parties (in line with appropriate clmt authorisation). But, I don't think an LA is legally bound to follow this.

Regards

Thanks Kevin. I suppose it's more of a 'best practice' thing where we need to encourage LAs to copy us in on correspondence with a view to minimising rent arrears and thereby preventing homelessness. Shame there's no legal argument we can back this up with. Also seems a shame that within the same LA some administrators are willing to help us out while others aren't.

Ho hum.