I work in a homeless hostel. We have been informed by our management team that we must put the same licence start date and move-in date on our licence agreements regardless of when the resident actually moved in. This is because HB are will not start paying until the first Monday of the licence.
This means that, either we lose a week's rent, we only admit on a Monday which could mean leaving people on the streets when we have a bed free, or the resident starting their licence already in debt for the first week's rent.
Any advice on how to deal with this? Will workers be committing benefit fraud if we enter a move-in date that is not correct? Do HB have a requirement to pay the rent that is owed regardless of move-in date? Or should they pay pro-rata, starting from the exact move-in-date?

I'm a bit confused, if a claimant has only just become liable for rent their eligibility starts from the benefit week in which they claim, not the following Monday, doesn't it?

HB is not payable purely based on liability - it requires the clmt to have moved in, or be deemed to have moved in under HB regs.

The rules are quite clear.

1) Single home: if the clmt moves in late (i.e. after liablity commences), HB is only payable for the period prioer to miving in if the criteria in HBR 7(8) is met.

2) Two homes: if the clmt moves into the second home late (i.e. after liability commences), HB is only payable if the criterion in HBR 7(6)(e) & HBR 7(8)(c)(i) are met.

Your post suggests your management team is well aware of those rules. If your cases do not fall within those rules (and it appears they don't), and your management is knowingly providing information to obtain benefit to which there is no entitlement, that is, in my opinion, out and out fraud. The person(s) responsible should be ashamed of themselves. In such circumstances, if I was at the LA concerned, I wouldn't hesitate to take action against them if it came to light. And, eventually, it will.

With regard to your personal position within your employment, you should probably seek legal advice. If it were me, I would refuse to undertake such instructions to avoid any possiblity of being party to what may be, potentially, criminal actions. In case you think this is just easy chat from the safety of a PC & keyboard, it isn't. I have worked at three LAs where my contract has been terminated because I refused to toe the LA line when they were quite deliberately ignoring the law - often to the detriment of the clmt.

As an aside, it is precisely this kind of conduct that makes it so much more difficult for landlords who attempt to conduct their business with integrity. It encourages LAs to be ever more cautious and circumspect. Sadly, based on substantial actual experience, L/Ls being "ecomomical with the truth" is not unique. So, it is hardly surprising when LAs increasingly ask for so many "i"'s to be dotted and "t"s to be crossed. Rightly or wrongly.

Well, that's my considered view..... . Guess I'd better run for a flak jacket now....

I agree with you Kevin. When I run housing benefit training courses for housing organisations this is one of the most common problems.

I advise that it is potential fraud and that the tenant should not be asked to lie.

I understand that small housing organisations are often strapped for cash so they are between a rock and hard place.
Your explanation of the regulations are what I explain . Housing benefit can be paid for 4 weeks before you move in but this has conditions and some people do not satisfy the rules.
Why can't they move in the same week they sign the agreement would be my question? In a hostel they are usually provided with a bed and basic furniture?

The issue is "voids" I know - empty homes or rooms with no rent coming in.
Its has been a on going problem and needs raising with the housing corporation perhaps!
Now have I made myself unpopular too?

I work at a supported Housing Association - this is a problem we are all too aware of. However, we tend to have the problem at the 'other end' so to speak. When our reisdents are ready to move on into their own tenancies, often they will view the new property on the Friday and the new landlord will have them sign a new tenancy to start the following Monday. They may not necessarily move into the new place on the first day of the tenancy. This is understandable, as many of our clients have mental health problems. To move immediately would be detrimental to their mental wellbeing - they need a gradual transition, physically and mentally.

If they don't 'officially' move for a week or so and we inform the LA of this fact, they are going to start their new independent living with rent arrears (extremely unhelpful, especially for our client group). The overlapping HB rules just don't cover it.

We want to act in the best interests of our clients. We have a choice - either:

1. We 'officially' exit them on the day their new tenancy starts - this avoids rent arrears at the new property, but we have to bear a loss ('void') for the week.
2. We are honest with the LA, and these vulnerable people are stuck with rent arrears from day 1 of independent living. As a result, they could end up back with us again when the new LL throws them out.

It seems to me there should be an addition to the 2 homes rule to allow for vulnerable people/mental health problems.

Anyone got any views on this?

Thanks
LD

"Why can't they move in the same week they sign the agreement would be my question?"
They do. The problem is, if they move in on a Wednesday and we start their licence on the Monday of the same week, HB will only pay from the Monday of the following week, meaning that the resident is liable for the first week's rent. Because of support costs etc, this is over £100. Not a great start for a vulnerable homeless person.
Thanks for your feedback. We are meeting with management next week.

The last post changes the situation somewhat...!

The following is subject to the 2-homes rules.

If the clmt moves into the accommodation in the same benefit week (i.e. Mon - Sun) that liability commences, the date of claim will be in that week. Therefore, it is a "first week" claim and HB commences from that week - HBR 76(1)&(2).

However, if your properties are hostels as stated, HBR 76(1) & (3) applies.

In short, your tenants should be awarded HB from the day they actually occupy SO LONG AS THEIR HB claim is made (or treated as made) in the same benefit week as BOTH liability and occupancy occur.

The reg for determining the date on which a claim is made, or treated as made, is HBR 83(5).

However, if your client's liability commenced on a Sat, but he didn't move in until the next benefit week (i.e. Mon or later), then it would be correct for HB to commence from the FOLLOWING Monday. There is case law confirming this interpretation - see Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Robinson <2004> EWCA Civ 342 - reported as R(H) 4/04 (www.osscsc.gov.uk).

Hope that clarifies the situation.