Would the 'non residence' affect my brothers benefit claim?

louloulouisa

Hi

My brother has autism and is ready to move out from my mums house.

We found a perfect property in a quiet area, but the estate agents said he can only live their 11 months of the year as the owners want to go back for 1 month of the year, which is fine as he can just go back to my mums for 4 weeks.

BUT the only thing the estate agents said is, check he will still receive his benefits as it's non residence??? I asked if he'll have a tenancy agreement and she said yes.

He gets PIP, Universal credit, and additional allowance. I imagine he'll get housing benefit and council tax help.

Would the 'non residence' affect his benefit claim?

Thank you :beer:

tomtom256

Yes, in the month he didn't live there, he wouldn't have a liability so would have to report the change and then claim the housing again. by reporting another change when he moved back.

He would also have to verify his housing everytime he did this.

pmlindyloo

I have never heard of a tenancy agreement like this.

Which 4 weeks of the year would he have to move out? In the middle of the tenancy?

Would he be liable for rent/council tax/utilities during this month if it was in the middle of his tenancy?

You need to ask the letting agency to email a copy of the tenancy agreement and then post on the House buying and renting forum and see what they think of the contract and your brother's liability during this 4 week period.

Housing Costs are part of Universal Credit. He would continue to get UC without the housing costs whilst at his mum's if he had no liability for rent during the 4 week period.

PIP would not be affected.

I do not know what additional allowance you are referring to.

Please check the benefits he is actually receiving.

A very strange set up.

calcotti

louloulouisa wrote: »

I imagine he'll get housing benefit :

No - help with rent is included in Universal Credit. He will need to evidence his tenancy in order to get the Housing element added to the UC award.

TELLIT01

pmlindyloo wrote: »

I have never heard of a tenancy agreement like this.

I'm guessing it's set up as basically a holiday let to ensure the owners can always get the house back. I may be wrong.

WhenIam64

If the AST is for a fixed 11 months, then it should qualify for HE. But the inference appears to be that although the OP can rent for 11 months, the landlords month is not fixed. If the OP has to move out when required, it would be a strange AST.

Seems to be one for the Decision Maker as advised in the original post. There is a High Court ruling that may be of use to the OP which I will try to find.

poppy12345

louloulouisa wrote: »

We found a perfect property in a quiet area, but the estate agents said he can only live their 11 months of the year as the owners want to go back for 1 month of the year, which is fine as he can just go back to my mums for 4 weeks.

I've never heard of this either, Very odd indeed. Having rented a house privately myself for many years, i'm sorry but i would not be happy giving it back for 1 month of the year.


I may rent it, but it's my home, not the landlords. When i sign a tenancy agreement it becomes mine until i give my notice.

whizzywoo

Sounds very much like a holiday let in a static caravan or similar.

Many have a rule thst you can only be in residence for 11 months of the year. The month you have to move out is usually the same each year. It is normally to fit in the local council rules about planning etc etc.

It would be unusual for one of these to qualify as a main residence. Some require you to be resident elsewhere and may require proof of council tax liability at that address.

poppasmurf_bewdley

We have many 11 month let mobile and chalet homes here in Worcestershire. Usually, they are all empty in January. which leads to a huge demand for B&B and other short term lets locally.

Most of them are permanent homes for the other 11 months of the year.

Many occupants, most usually pensioners, choose to spend the month abroad in places such as Spain.

PasturesNew

My advice would be to avoid this property, it'd never feel like "his home" and they might put in an appearance at any other time, to "see if there's post, we're back now, you're moving out next week aren't you" - most unsettling for anybody with ASD.

He needs a proper home, that's his, not some weird form of house borrowing.

CIS

For council tax purposes (and any associated liability) there would be issues that would need to be looked in to in far greater depth. It may well remain the owner's 'sole or main residence' but it would need far more information to make certain. The whole thing would cause problems.