I am looking at the benefit implications if a 16 year old, school age person succeeds to the tenancy of her late mother. My belief is that she can claim HB on nil income. However, what if her father (parents were separated) moves in to care for her. He could logically claim CB and CTC in respect of his daughter in order to support her, but what effect on her HB? Is her income still nil? Is he her non-dependant and therefore she may cease to receive full HB? If he himself is on IS, then they would have got full HB if he had been able to be the tenant, but not this way. Is is possible to be the dependant of your non-dependant?!

There is no reason why the Father could not claim Housing Benefit. He could be treated as liable to make payments even if he is not the tenant. That way if he is on Income Support he will receive the full amount of HB applicable and CTax and there would not be a non dependant charge.

Sorry forgot to add obviously in this case the daughter would not then be claimaing as she would be a dependant on her Father's claim for benefit.

This sounds hopeful, but can you quote me the legislation on this? I thought someone could only be treated as liable for the rent if the actual person liable was no longer paying (and in my experience this has also always meant that the liable person has left the property, although I could see it could work if the daughter remains but never pays any rent). But also the CPAG handbook quotes a legal case saying the agreement to pay rent (or in his case it would be 'use and occupation charges') must be legally enforceable. I'm no housing law expert, but I thought there wouldn't be any enforceable agreement for him to pay if his daughter is the tenant - the agreement would be with her - so how could he be held liable?

The Regulation is HB Reg 6(1)(c)(iii).

There is nothing in that regulation which says that the liable person is no longer occupying the dwelling, only that the liable person is not making the payments. There is no way that the daughter could make those payments if she has no income.

The agreement to pay rent or use and occupation charges is not an issue in this case because the person who has the libility (ie the daughter) does have a legally enforceable liability (see Kingston upon Thames RBC ex p Prince and anor cited by Findlay)

The analysis of Reg 6 by Findlay where the legal liability is an issue is concerned with the person addressed by Reg 6(1)(a), not the person addressed by Reg 6(1)(c)(iii)

Although his decision was in relation to a joint tenant who was unable to pay, Commisioner Jacobs gives a clear rundown in CH3376/2002

CH 3376 2002 is available here, from the cmmrs site

The Housing Benefit (General) Regulations 1987

6. Circumstances in which a person is to be treated as liable to make payments in respect of a dwelling

(c) a person who has to make the payments if he is to continue to live in the home because the person liable to make them is not doing so and either-

(ii) he is some other person whom it is reasonable to treat as liable to make the payments;

If he were to claim Housing Benefits his Daughter would have to not be paying the rent but it is perfectly reasonable for the guardian of someone who is of school age to take over the responsibility of payimg the rent. It would be enforcable because the Landlord would take action to evict the Daughter if no rent was paid and he would have to vacate at the same time.

Thank you all for this very useful info - it all makes sense to me - hope the LA thinks likewise!