HB&CT suspended for review.

baza52

fluffymovie wrote: »

That is odd then but as a benefit manager my advice given previously stands

Ok Thanks anyway.

tomitma

What a stupid man you are, its all very well talking about your rights, and getting your rent and council tax paid, plus god knows how many other benefits you are getting, It is also the councils right to find out how many people and what there income is, that are living in social housing.

You can stick to your guns as much as you like, but the council will stick to theres, as far as the council are concerned, once a child has left education, they are then classed as lodgers, and are expected to pay something towards the rent, how this hasen't already happened with your son, I don't know.

Remember whilst you are living off the benefits, of the taxes that working people are paying, you have to abide by the rules, and if the council want information, you have to provide it.

Stupid man

real1314

fluffymovie wrote: »

I would say that housing benefit have a right to request you to provide information in accordance with regulation 93 or 95 (not got them to hand!) and the fact that your wife is on DLA does nit mean you are under no obligation.

However, the LA can apply a max income for a non dep which would normally lead to a high non dep deduction.

If they wish to review the case, you can confirm you will not provide the information regarding the non dep and they can carry on with the rest of it

Fluffy, the LA also have to comply with the data protection act, which includes the requirement that they do not hold or request information which is un-neccessary. I've seen many LAs take the approach this one has, but would suggest that in every case they are inbreach of the DPA and would also be liable to action from the Local Govt Ombudsman if they were to apply a max non-dep deduction whilst they have full knowledge of a high rate DLA care award.

The only way LAs will stop gathering un-neccesary data (which actually costs the taxpayer money to gather, check and store for no real purpose) is if people like yourself start to change procedures to ensure that it is stopped.:cool:

real1314

tomitma wrote: »

What a stupid man you are, its all very well talking about your rights, and getting your rent and council tax paid, plus god knows how many other benefits you are getting, It is also the councils right to find out how many people and what there income is, that are living in social housing.

1. They know who is living there.
2. They don't need to know the income of those people though. If you want them to spend taxpayers money issuing letters and taking actions that are irrelevant to the award, then I think you've got things a bit mixed up.

You can stick to your guns as much as you like, but the council will stick to theres, as far as the council are concerned, once a child has left education, they are then classed as lodgers, and are expected to pay something towards the rent, how this hasen't already happened with your son, I don't know.

The reason that you don't know is because you are offering an opinion on a subject which you clearly have little knowledge of. Where the customer or partner in a HB or CTB claim receive DLA Care at the higher or middle rate (might even be the lower rate too) then a non-dependant deduction is not applied.


Remember whilst you are living off the benefits, of the taxes that working people are paying, you have to abide by the rules, and if the council want information, you have to provide it.

Stupid man

Which is more stupid, a man who asks a question or one who forms a firm opinion on a subject they know nothing about? And what's more, one who wishes to see taxpayers money wasted on unneccessary bureaucracy!

fluffymovie

Hi Real. A non dep would be a part of the household and therefore, the LA are entitled to enquire.

However the claimant being on DLA care would negate any non dep deduction.

I would be interested to hear of CD's where DPA was raised as an issue. Perhaps youcould PM me,

real1314

A request for information would not be something that a CD (i.e a commissioner'ss decision) would apply to.

Why would a LA apply a non-dep deduction if DLA care was in payment? Wouldn't it be a perverse decision?

I know it's "the way we do it" but that doesn't make it right. I would hope any HB review would refer such a decision back to the LA as an error and request that the claim be corrected and the non-dep deduction be removed.

I really can't see any other justification other than "that's what we do".

I'm not directly familiar with the actual regs used to request info from customers, but I'd guess that words to the effect of "reasonable request" would be in there; What would be reasonable about requesting information that would not affect the rate of benefit?

Time for this sort of practice to be stopped?

real1314

fluffymovie wrote: »

Hi Real. A non dep would be a part of the household and therefore, the LA are entitled to enquire.

However the claimant being on DLA care would negate any non dep deduction.

I would be interested to hear of CD's where DPA was raised as an issue. Perhaps youcould PM me,

Just to pick up on this line "entitled to enquire" - Why? A LA doesn't have carte blanche to ask for information.

fluffymovie

No as stated however, regulations do state that the claimant must provide documents reasonably required?

baza52

At last, someone see's where im coming from.
Im not trying to hide anything just exercise my rights and my daughters.

I appreciate im in receipt of tax payers money (and should comply) but i fail to see why i should do things because im asked when there is absolutely no need.

Macro_3

fluffymovie wrote: »

No as stated however, regulations do state that the claimant must provide documents reasonably required?

I don't think it's a reasonable request, really, and suspending the claim whilst waiting for them would be a financial error. (Besides, who has so little to do at the moment that they'd knowingly waste time with something like this :eek:)

It seems like a mistake, if anything: ie the officer has noticed that child benefit has ended and goes onto auto pilot, suspends claim to prevent overpayment, DLA care gets overlooked, and the letter is dashed off. The OP called to query and perhaps spoke to someone other than the person who wrote out (maybe call centre or admin etc) who requested that the OP supply the wage slip anyway just to cover their back. I'd be willing to bet that it's just a simple mistake.

A little note from you, OP, stating that you are on DLA care and won't be supplying wage slips should suffice. The benefit officer will receive the note, realise they have been a bit dippy and remove the suspension. Happy days.