Hello all

In the good old days, our LA would pay HB claims for short periods based on nil income, as long as the claimant had completed a 'nil income form'. This covered very short stays (during which time the claimant had not sorted out their IS/JSA claim), or gaps at the start of tenancies where there was a short gap before the JSA/IS was up & running.

Our LA has recently started requesting bank statements in order to award for periods of nil income. It is almost impossible for us to get these, especially if the resident has moved on.

Are the LA within their rights to refuse to pay HB if bank statements are not provided to support nil income periods? If the DWP award IS/JSA a few days after the resident has moved in, surely any reasonable person could see the claimant doesn't have savings in excess of £6k.

Thanks all

This is a tough one. When I first started reading, I thought it was going to be that the LA had stopped accepting "nil income" claims. That would have been easy....

The LA has two options:

1) accept a clmt's word; or
2) require evidence

The LA are clearly taking the second option. In my view, I think that the LA have a sound legal basis on which to make the request. Stainsby would be very quick to point out that, in English law, there is no requirement for corroboration. That is true, but only upto a point.

The trouble is, HBR 86 provides the power for an LA to make such a request. Further, in CH/4688/2003 para (11), it was found:

"The issue is what the local authority requires in order to calculate entitlement. If the claimant cannot provide it, that may prevent the local authority making a decision at all or making one that is as favourable as it might otherwise be. But the issue under the regulation is: what information does the local authority reasonably require? And in the context that must mean: require for the purposes of operating the housing benefit scheme and, in particular, determining proper entitlement to housing benefit."

NB: I stand to be corrected, but there appears to be a typo - the word "not" seems to be missing for the phrase "...or making one that is as favourable...".

In my view, the LA's request is reasonable - it would certainly be very difficult to challenge successfully (at least based on the info available so far).

Regards

The question of reasonable is always a vexed one. My interpretation is "what is reasonable in the circumstances"

Surely in circumstances such as these, the local authority is asking your client for information that is almost impossible to provide, therefore is the request a reasonable one?

If you can demonstrate the difficulty in providing the information they require, then you may have a case.

Lostdog: no prob (re credit)

steve_h:

As per CH/4688/2003 (para 11 - as set out in my previous post), The test for evidence is not whether a clmt can provide it; but "....what information does the local authority reasonably require?"......for the particular purpose of "...determining proper entitlement to housing benefit."

In other words, the reasonableness applies in terms of what the LA needs; not (normally) what the clmt can supply.

I think it is hard to argue against an LA requiring bank statements to verify capital in the circumstances set out by Lostdog.

Regards

Stainbsy

Thanks for the prompt & comprehensive response. I can see what you are saying. However, would it not be reasonable to assume that if a claimant was awarded JSA commencing a few days after their tenancy started, that they would be highly unlikely to have had savings over £6k for the preceeding, say, 3 or 4 days? Just wondering if the 'reasonableness' argument would hold any sway....

Thanks

Thanks steve_h - it was a posting cross-over, but looks like we're thinking along the same lines!!
LD

Just realised I thanked Stainsby for Kevin D's post. So just to put the record straight, "Thanks Kevin!"