Applying for council tax benifit but current account shows several 5 figure amounts

Housing_Benefit_Officer

happenstance wrote: »

I have all the bank statements but it seams like it isn't even worth the hassle to apply for it. Its only 10 pounds a week. Its annoying as I've always worked and should in a fair world get it.

Only £10 per week! That is £520 per year - a large chunk off your bill. If you can't be bothered then don't apply if you think it is too much hassle. Then the money can go towards someone more deserving of support.

Housing_Benefit_Officer

HappyMJ wrote: »

It is a fair world. You have the proof and will get CTB.

Won't get a penny CTB - CTB was scrapped on 1st April 2013.

happenstance

Housing_Benefit_Officer wrote: »

Only £10 per week! That is £520 per year - a large chunk off your bill. If you can't be bothered then don't apply if you think it is too much hassle. Then the money can go towards someone more deserving of support.

I don't intend to be unemployed for a whole year!! At the most a couple of weeks and applying for this is delaying my job search, its all about cost benefit analysis.

Im no less deserving of support than anyone else thank you very much.

happenstance

Housing_Benefit_Officer wrote: »

Won't get a penny CTB - CTB was scrapped on 1st April 2013.

It just got a new name..

Housing_Benefit_Officer

happenstance wrote: »

It just got a new name..

No it was scrapped not renamed.

Each Council now runs its own Local Support Scheme that isn't a benefit but a local discount. If you disagree with a Council Tax Support decision it doesn't go to the Tribunal Service but the Valuation Office Agency.

happenstance

Housing_Benefit_Officer wrote: »

No it was scrapped not renamed.

Each Council now runs its own Local Support Scheme that isn't a benefit but a local discount. If you disagree with a Council Tax Support decision it doesn't go to the Tribunal Service but the Valuation Office Agency.

Its still the same outcome though, money off council tax.

happenstance

Got this sorted today and the assessor was way nicer than the militant people on here saying I was committing fraud.

I was just honest, showed all the statements that i borrowed money and paid back some of it and that was it sorted. As they said i've paid NI for many years so thats what it's there for.

I do hear that being honest with the benefits office is often not a good thing to do, but has worked out well so far.

rogerblack

happenstance wrote: »

Got this sorted today and the assessor was way nicer than the militant people on here saying I was committing fraud.

Part of the problem here is that the DWP and council officers have extremely wide discretion.
If you hit one, you may find they consider a holiday to florida for the family if you haven't had one in 5 years to be completely reasonable.
With another, they may consider 'tesco finest' to be extravagance.
This is part of the reason why deprivation of capital questions are so tough, combined with the fact that it may hinge on your state of mind when making payments.

happenstance

rogerblack wrote: »

Part of the problem here is that the DWP and council officers have extremely wide discretion.
If you hit one, you may find they consider a holiday to florida for the family if you haven't had one in 5 years to be completely reasonable.
With another, they may consider 'tesco finest' to be extravagance.
This is part of the reason why deprivation of capital questions are so tough, combined with the fact that it may hinge on your state of mind when making payments.

I assume you don't mean actually hitting a person?

They might go through what I spend my money on? If anyone did that I would just leave it, what food I buy is my concern.

Are you saying that somewhere down the line someone else might just decide something else and I would have to pay back the money? Thats what I really dont want to happen, would rather not claim it and thats why I'm being totally honest from the outset.

rogerblack

happenstance wrote: »

Are you saying that somewhere down the line someone else might just decide something else and I would have to pay back the money? Thats what I really dont want to happen, would rather not claim it and thats why I'm being totally honest from the outset.

The general policy is only to revise a questionable decision when there is clear evidence that it was very obviously wrong.

In principle, yes, they can go back later and decide the decision was wrong, and have made an error.