Sub letting in a council house?

tb1105

Thanks Jowo. Him and Gran are joint tenants.

He is employed and not on any benefits but he is mid 50's so doesn't have long left in work (and he has to leave they won't extend his emplyoyment).
He has right to buy on the house but no one will give him a mortgage due to the time left he has in employment and also the house is reema so he can't get a mortgage anyway.

Houses are over subscribed in this area, lots of pregnant teenagers, waiting list for our town is currently 2 years which is why I think they will be keen to move him and I think it will be in his best interest to get a smaller, more manageable and affordable house.

Pepzofio

If he claims Income Support, income-based JSA/ESA or Pension Credit, then he will need to declare it to them as income. He shouldn't have to declare it for Housing Benefit purposes if he is on any of these benefits, as these are passporting benefits, meaning he will automatically qualify for full HB. It's always a good idea to tell them just in case though (it just won't affect entitlement).

If he claims HB but is not on a passporting benefit then he would definitely need to declare it as income. I think they disregard the first £20 per room of any 'rent' from lodgers, so if he got £50/wk per room, then they would treat this as £30/wk income. I THINK they might also do this for IS, ib-JSA/ESA & PC but not sure.

But if you & your husband are currently paying him rent/board then he should be declaring this anyway. Council tenants need to be careful, as getting the housing office's permission to have additional occupants/lodgers is not necessarily the same as notifying HB of the change in circumstances and having your claim adjusted accordingly! The two departments are normally completely separate.

Also, he'd be better off getting lodgers rather than sub-tenants, as lodgers have less security of tenure and will be easier to get rid of in the event that things don't work out. Someone else will be able to give more/better advice, but basically as I understand it, sub-tenants have exclusive possession of at least 1 room and as such have a tenancy, whereas with lodgers you retain the right to enter their room and only have to give them 'reasonable notice' to leave.

Jowo_2

Well, I guess in the future the choice will be his as to whether he wants to maximise his income by having lodgers (but mind find this quite stressful to live with strangers instead of family) or minimise his expenses by moving to a 1 bed place where he can live in greater peace and privacy.

Also, if he claims means tested benefits in the future (say for example if he's made redundant) he may find his lodgers contributions wipe out his entitlement so he might be worse off than living in his own place.

You should run the pros and cons of these 2 scenarios past him.

Fire_Fox

Your father-in-law will need to register with the inland revenue for the rent-a-room scheme, as well as advise the council if he is in receipt of any means tested benefits.

PasturesNew

When the time comes to look at moving to a smaller council place it might not mean he pays less rent. I looked at rents which were published a few years ago in a town where I was living and 1-bed flats cost more per week than 3-bed houses. In many areas there's little difference between the two at all - and might even be more to downsize.

Jowo_2

Ok, rents may not differ too much in your area (but hopefully there would be some saving between a 1 bed and 4 bed property!) but the council tax will be lower, so will the gas/electricity, possibly the water, insurance and so forth.

Also, a single person on benefits is entitled to a 1 bedroom room rate for Local Housing Allowance. Someone rattling round a 4 bed property that becomes unemployed could struggle if its empty and could be impacted by the income of the lodgers. Seems a bit of a trap.

PasturesNew

Jowo wrote: »

Also, a single person on benefits is entitled to a 1 bedroom room rate for Local Housing Allowance. Someone rattling round a 4 bed property that becomes unemployed could struggle if its empty and could be impacted by the income of the lodgers. Seems a bit of a trap.

LHA is fairly new and at the moment it is not applied to council houses, so you could rattle around in a 12-bed council house and still have the full rent paid ... of course, over time, I expect that will change.

Dontknowanymore

If his income is so low that he cant afford to pay the full rent on a council property then would he not be entitiled to any housing benefit?