Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v RR (HB)
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judge | Judge Rowland |
| Neutral Citation | [2018] UKUT 180 (AAC),[2018] UKUT 180 (AAC) |
| Court | Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) |
| Subject Matter | Housing,council tax benefits,council tax benefits - rent restrictions,Rowland,M |
| Date | 24 May 2018 |
| Published date | 06 June 2018 |
Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v RR (HB) [2018] UKUT 180 (AAC)
CH/211/2015
1
IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL Case No. CH/211/2015
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS CHAMBER
Before Upper Tribunal Judge Rowland
Attendances:
The Secretary of State was represented by Mr Alistair Mills of counsel, instructed by
the Government Legal Department.
The claimant’s appointee appeared in person.
The local authority was not represented.
Decision: The Secretary of State’s appeal is allowed. The decision of the First-tier
tribunal dated 23 September 2014 is set aside and there is substituted a decision
that the claimant’s entitlement to housing benefit is to be assessed from 1 April 2013
on the basis that the eligible rent is reduced by 14%.
REASONS FOR DECISION
1. This is an appeal, brought by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
with permission granted by Upper Tribunal Judge Lloyd-Davies, against a decision of
the First-tier Tribunal dated 23 September 2014 whereby it allowed the claimant’s
appeal against a decision of Knowsley Borough Council dated 5 April 2013 to the
effect that the claimant’s entitlement to housing benefit was to be assessed from 1
April 2013 on the basis that the eligible rent was reduced by 14% because there
were three bedrooms in the dwelling that he occupied as his home and he required
only two. The First-tier Tribunal decided that there were two bedrooms in the
dwelling and so there was to be no reduction in the eligible rent.
The legislation
2. By virtue of regulation 11(1) of the Housing Benefit Regulations 2006 (SI
2006/213) as much amended, the amount of housing benefit to which a person is
entitled is calculated by reference to a claimant’s “eligible rent” which, in the present
case, is by virtue of regulations 12BA(1) and (2) and A13(1) the “maximum rent
(social sector)” as determined in accordance with regulation B13. Regulation B13
provides –
“B13.—(1) The maximum rent (social sector) is determined in accordance with
paragraphs (2) to (4).
(2) The relevant authority must determine a limited rent by–
(a) determining the amount that the claimant’s eligible rent would be in
accordance with regulation 12B(2) without applying regulation 12B(4) and (6);
(b) where the number of bedrooms in the dwelling exceeds the number of
bedrooms to which the claimant is entitled in accordance with paragraphs (5)
to (7), reducing that amount by the appropriate percentage set out in
paragraph (3); and
To continue reading
Request your trial
1 cases
-
FT v Perth and Kinross Council and Secretary of State for Work & Pensions (HB)
...by landlords when a property was being let (and indeed in borderline cases the landlord’s designation may be determinative: SSWP v RR [2018] UKUT 180 (AAC)). Then case sensitive factors such as configuration, overall dimensions, access, natural and electric lighting, ventilation and privacy......