Council Tax Benefit - does someone understand this regulation?

minimadtrix

Are there any Council Tax Benefit Wizards on here that understand the following regulations please?

Regulation 11 Circumstances in which a person is to be treated as being or not being a member of the household

(1) Subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), the claimant and any partner and, where the claimant or his partner is treated as responsible by virtue of regulation 10 (circumstances in which a person is to be treated as responsible or not responsible for another) for a child or young person, that child or young person and any child of that child or young person, shall be treated as members of the same household notwithstanding that any of them is temporarily absent from that household.

(2) A child or young person shall not be treated as a member of the claimant's household where he is—
(a) placed with the claimant or his partner by a local authority under section 23(2)(a) of the Children Act 1989 or by a voluntary organisation under section 59(1)(a) of that Act, or in Scotland boarded out with the claimant or his partner under a relevant enactment; or
(b) placed, or in Scotland boarded out, with the claimant or his partner prior to adoption; or
(c) placed for adoption with the claimant or his partner in accordance with the Adoption and Children Act 2002 or the Adoption Agencies (Scotland) Regulations 1996.

(3) Subject to paragraph (4), paragraph (1) shall not apply to a child or young person who is not living with the claimant and he—
(a) is being looked after by, or in Scotland is in the care of, a local authority under a relevant enactment; or
(b) has been placed, or in Scotland boarded out, with a person other than the claimant prior to adoption; or
(c) has been placed for adoption in accordance with the Adoption and Children Act 2002 or the Adoption Agencies (Scotland) Regulations 1996.

For information Regulation 10 is:-

Circumstances in which a person is to be treated as responsible or not responsible for another

(1) Subject to the following provisions of this regulation a person shall be treated as responsible for a child or young person who is normally living with him and this includes a child or young person to whom paragraph (3) of regulation 9 applies.

(2) Where a child or young person spends equal amounts of time in different households, or where there is a question as to which household he is living in, the child or young person shall be treated for the purposes of paragraph (1) as normally living with—
(a) the person who is receiving child benefit in respect of him; or
(b) if there is no such person—
(i) where only one claim for child benefit has been made in respect of him, the person who made that claim; or
(ii) in any other case the person who has the primary responsibility for him.

(3) For the purposes of these Regulations a child or young person shall be the responsibility of only one person in any benefit week and any person other than the one treated as responsible for the child or young person under this regulation shall be treated as not so responsible.

Does this mean that if someone i.e. a partner, is not responsible for children and is not living in the household, that they are not to be classed as a member of said household?

CIS

These regs are only in respect of children/young persons.

What exactly is the query regarding ?

minimadtrix

Thanks CIS.

Would you be able to point me in the direction of a regulation where an adult is to be classed as a member of the household? (I know it's a big ask, I've trawled through the regs, but being a mere 'Jo Public' I'm completely in the dark)

CIS

Its a while since Ive read the actual regulations but I'll have a look through the book I have.

I'm assuming that a non-resident partner has been taken as being part of the claim for a council tax benefit claim ?

minimadtrix

Yes - the situation is this - I'll try to condense it as much as possible.

I have moved some 350 miles from 'home', leaving OH there. He is completely dependant on benefits (IB etc), I work full time.

Due to his situation, he contacted the CTB to ask if he would be able to make a claim. They said yes - under Housing Benefits Regulations (Working Age) 2006

Regulation 21 Circumstances in which a person is to be treated as being or not being a member of the household.

(1) subject to paragraphs (2) to (4) the claimant and any partner, and where the claimant or his partner is treated as responsible by virtue of regulation 20 (circumstacnes in which a person is to be treated as responsible or not responsible for anotehr) for a child or young person, that child or young person and any child of that child or young person, shall be treated as members of the same household notwithstanding that any of them is temporarily living away from the other membes of his family.

(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to a person who is living away from the other members of his family where-

(a) that person does not intend to resume living witht he other members of his family or

(b) his absense from the other members of his family is likely to exceed 52 weeks, unless there are exceptional circumstances (for example where the person is in hospital or otherwise has no control over the length of his absence) and the absence is unlikely to be substantially more than 52 weeks.

So, OH has been receiving a small CTB payment. However, some 6 months later, they have decided that they should have referred to the CT Regs as quoted in my first post.

I work full time and do not travel 'home' at all. We do not have any children.

HTH and once again thanks for your feedback

bigbill

If your still a couple then you count as living there as this is where you call home, so no discount and possibly no benfit due as your income will be added to theirs in the means tested calculation.

DeeT_2

If you are still regarding yourself to be a couple, separated only by working arrangements, then your household comprises of all members of your family, and CTB should be assessed taking into account both your partner's benefits and your wages. It runs hand in hand with the 'sole or main place of residence' rule. If you stay somewhere Monday to Friday to work, but return home at weekends, your home remains your main place of residence, and that is where you should pay council tax, and claim any benefits accordingly.

minimadtrix

bigbill wrote: »

If your still a couple then you count as living there as this is where you call home, so no discount and possibly no benfit due as your income will be added to theirs in the means tested calculation.

But that is the problem - that 'home' is not my home any more, I'm in full time employment, living in rented accommodation 350 miles away. I haven't seen that property in over 7 months

DeeT_2

So would you say you 'moved' completely. Have you re-registered for doctors and dentist in the new area, and have you been billed for council tax there? Is the job permanent, and you are likely to remain living there? Or is it a fixed term contract, and you intend to return to the other address at the end of it?

minimadtrix

DeeT wrote: »

So would you say you 'moved' completely. Have you re-registered for doctors and dentist in the new area, and have you been billed for council tax there? Is the job permanent, and you are likely to remain living there? Or is it a fixed term contract, and you intend to return to the other address at the end of it?

Yes, I've moved lock, stock and barrel - even on the local electoral role. I have a full time permanent contact and have no intention to return to that property (it's up for sale).

dmg24

It sounds like this is your husband, not just a partner, and you own the house? Do you no longer have financial links?