Can anyone clarify the rule for me in what must be a fairly common scenario? If a tenant goes, for example, into hospital, HB will continue (subject to the time limits) as long as they intend to return. If it becomes clear that they will not be able to return (eg need to go to a nursing home) they hand in their notice. Our experience, and expectation, is that HB will stop from the date they hand in their notice as that is the point at which they make the decision not to return, but of course this leaves them with a rental liability for the notice period not covered by HB. Is this correct, and if not, what legislation can I quote to get HBOs to pay for the notice period?

For HB in these circs, only HBR 7(7) can potentially help. It says:

---------------------
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 home ("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.
--------------------

Note - if the person is liable to make payments in respect of the new dwelling, HB CANNOT be paid under this provision.

Regards

Thanks for this. What if (as is often the case) the move to the new 'dwelling' does not happen for some time after the decision not to return, eg they remain in the hospital/mental health unit or whatever until a suitable placement is found? Can the hospital etc count as a dwelling so the circumstance is still covered by 7(7)?

Their will be other posters who will argue that a hospital is a dwelling. In my view, that is incorrect. You could try and argue it with the LA, but if you succeed this should be treated as a bonus (at least in my opinion).

Most of my work is through LAs and my decision would, easily, be that a hospital is not a dwelling in the situation you describe and I'd be confident of such a decision being upheld at Tribunal (and certainly at Commissioners).

Regards