Housing Benefit - Contrived Tenancy?

jonesjimmy

HAMUHA

have you been challenged on the deprivation of capital and this used against your dads LHA claim?

Hamuhu

jonesjimmy wrote: »

HAMUHA

have you been challenged on the deprivation of capital and this used against your dads LHA claim?

They have not declined his LHA claim based on this when he claimed last year.

FBaby

It sounds like your dad mace decision in his life to benefit you and you have just accepted. It its very hard to believe that his offering to sign over his half of the property and you accepting because your dad insisted was just innocent actions.

It is also hard to believe that the latest arrangement is a commercial one when all you can come up with is that your dad pays you cash going to the bank once a month when all that would be required is for your dad to set a direct debit our is your dad also absolutely insisting they he pays cash against your wishes?

Poppie68

Maybe if you explained it to your father that he would'nt be paying the rent, the tax payers would be, he would decide to go with your offer of no rent needs paying. In the end he does'nt gain anything.You do and you have already stated you don't want to except any rent.

fishybusiness

I feel sorry for your parents in this tangle.

They have literally given you a house at below market value and what do they get for it?

Hassle and loss of benefits.

If they cannot afford your rent, maybe you can simply ask them to maintain it for the rest of their days?

If I was in a position of being able to provide for my parents so as to give them an easier time, allowing them to spend some of their money on living during retirement, I'd jump at the chance.

I think you have lost the plot!!

pickpocketlocket

pickpocketlocket wrote: »

Were/ are his name on the deeds? If so, when were they removed, and why?

Do you allow all your tenants to pay you in cash? Why was a standing order not set up? Have you declared his rent as income for tax purposes?

If your father was on such a low income that he would have been entitled to benefits, how could he afford to pay you the full market rate for so long?

Your reason for using an agent to initially vet the tenants seems fair, however why did you not then self manage, once the tenants were in place?

You have not answered these questions?

pickpocketlocket

jonesjimmy wrote: »

By the letter of the law.

The landlord is fulfilling his end of the bargain.

Evidence suggests that this is a commercial tenancy.

The LA may refuse on the grounds of contrivance but this may be overturned at a tribunal as the LA don't have a valid argument suggesting that this is a contrived tenancy. Merely stating that the bank account doesn't show enough evidence won't stand by the sounds of what this person is saying.

Leaving all emotions out of this particular case, the law states that this is commercial. Thats the bottom line folks!

Which law is it that states this is legal?