Benefits question Help needed

lj777

Hi guys, I have a friend living in london and he's trying to apply for credit card. after several disapprovals i suggest him getting on the electoral roll.
But then the problem comes, he's a lodger and the landlord (who also lives at his address) is getting housing benefits, single parent, low incomes benefits etc and my friend was told that he can't because it will affect his landlord's benefit entitlement/amount? as he would be an extra adult living at the same address.
Would it actually affect his landlord's benefit entitlement?
it seems that my suggestion has led to a complex situation for my friend, his landlord is now talking about increasing the rent if it affects his benefits

Savvy_Spender_South

absolutly it would. what his landlord is doing is cheating the system (i am not judging just explaining)

He is taking an income without declaring it to the system. your friend pays cash in hand and has nothing to show, no address and no rights.

It may suit all parties but it will stay in limbo until some official declarations are made or your friend moves on to a legitimate address.

Duncombe

Yes. Get your friend to report his "landlord" for benefit fraud

lj777

Savvy_Spender_South wrote: »

It may suit all parties but it will stay in limbo until some official declarations are made or your friend moves on to a legitimate address.

thanks for that, though i m not sure i understand the last thing you said, for example for single parent benefit, if my friend and his landlord are both registered in the same address, will this affect his landlord's entitlement, despite the pay rent in cash thing?

Benefits_Bod

Whether the LL's benefits will be affected depends. Income from a lodger is normally taken into account for means tested benefits - although part of that income is disregardable.

If the LL is deliberately failing to disclose a material fact that affects his means tested benefits, he is potentially committing fraud related criminal offences.

However, by failing to include the lodger on the electoral roll, the LL may well be committing a further offence - he is legally required to include ALL relevant persons on the electoral form that comes around once a year. That includes lodgers.

My advice would be for the lodger to approach the local Council's electoral services section advising that he believes the LL's omission was an oversight / error and asking to be added to the electoral roll. The LL need not be involved with that correction although the lodger's name will of course appear on the next request by the Council for persons to be included on the electoral roll.

Savvy_Spender_South

Duncombe wrote: »

Yes. Get your friend to report his "landlord" for benefit fraud

your sentiment is right, after all fraud is fraud but he may end up homeless, what price his compliance? a reduction in rent? 30 pieces of silver? :cool:

lj777

Benefits_Bod wrote: »

Whether the LL's benefits will be affected depends. Income from a lodger is normally taken into account for means tested benefits - although part of that income is disregardable.

If the LL is deliberately failing to disclose a material fact that affects his means tested benefits, he is potentially committing fraud related criminal offences.

However, by failing to include the lodger on the electoral roll, the LL may well be committing a further offence - he is legally required to include ALL relevant persons on the electoral form that comes around once a year. That includes lodgers.

My advice would be for the lodger to approach the local Council's electoral services section advising that he believes the LL's omission was an oversight / error and asking to be added to the electoral roll. The LL need not be involved with that correction although the lodger's name will of course appear on the next request by the Council for persons to be included on the electoral roll.

thanks for that. I didn't know about that, thought you could choose whether to be included into the electoral roll. when do the request from council come normally?

Benefits_Bod

lj777 wrote: »

...thought you could choose whether to be included into the electoral roll. when do the request from council come normally?

No choice. Canvass forms normally drop through at about this time of the year (already had mine).

seven-day-weekend

It is an offence to not register on the electoral roll if you are eligible. The thing you have a choice about is, once you are on the roll, is whether or not to appear on the edited register which anyone can use for marketing, advertising and similar purposes.

From this link: http://www.stratford.gov.uk/Council/Council-404.cfm

Why should I register? If you do not register, you will not be able to vote at any election. The Register of Electors is used by credit reference agencies to verify residency of persons applying for credit. It could be more difficult to get credit if you are not on the register. It is a criminal offence not to complete and return the annual registration form, or to provide inaccurate or false information; liable to a fine up to £1,000.

We had our form about a month ago.

AnxiousMum

As he has learnt, not being on the electoral roll has caused him problems when applying for credit. He also would not have been able to vote in the last election, as he wasn't on the roll. That aside.....the landlord is likely getting a discount on his council tax by not declaring the lodger, and the lodger is not entitled to claim any assistance with housing benefit etc. as he's not 'officially' at the address.

If the landlord is concerned about it affecting his 'income', or 'means tested benefits', then the landlord obviously KNOWS he is committing fraud. Your friend would be better off getting a proper room, where he has the rights and benefits of having done so, and report the landlord and get one more cheat off of the system.

Sodapop

The only way to get out of being on the electoral roll is to apply for anonymous registration and you need a VERY good reason e.g. domestic violence. I think your friend needs to move house and report the LL as others have said.