LHA paid direct to L; the 8-week rule

[Paul_W]

Ok, I've read all the posts that mention the 8 week rule for LHA payment direct to LL. But no mention of exactly how this operates.

When is the start of the 8 week rule?
Is is from the initial period of non payment of rent on the AST?
Or from the start of the LHA period?


So, where an AST is monthly is the tenant 8 weeks in arrears from the day of the second month of non-payment.


In my situation AST period from 26th to 25th month, LHA last payment period to 13th Sept

Payment due 26th August not paid
Payment due 26th Sept makes tenant two months in arrears

So, my question, on 26th Spetember if no payment received is the tenant 8 weeks in arrears?

[tom999]

Ok, I've read all the posts that mention the 8 week rule for LHA payment direct to LL. But no mention of exactly how this operates.
You may need to read some more...

The Housing Benefit Regulations 2006, PART 12, Payments, s.95 (page 84) (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2006/uksi_20060213_en.pdf)

"Circumstances in which payment is to be made to a landlord
95.—(1) Subject to paragraph (2) and paragraph 8(4) of Schedule A1(a) (treatment of claims for housing benefit by refugees), a payment of rent allowance shall be made to a landlord (and in this regulation the “landlord” includes a person to whom rent is payable by the person entitled to that allowance)—
(a) where under Regulations made under the Administration Act an amount of income support or a jobseeker’s allowance payable to the claimant or his partner is being paid direct to the landlord; or
(b) where sub-paragraph (a) does not apply and the person is in arrears of an amount equivalent to 8 weeks or more of the amount he is liable to pay his landlord as rent, except where it is in the overriding interest of the claimant not to make direct payments to the landlord.
(2) Any payment of rent allowance made to a landlord pursuant to this regulation or to regulation 96 (circumstances in which payment may be made to a landlord) shall be to discharge, in whole or in part, the liability of the claimant to pay rent to that landlord in respect of the dwelling concerned, except in so far as—
(a) the claimant had no entitlement to the whole or part of that rent allowance so paid to his landlord;
and
(b) the overpayment of rent allowance resulting was recovered in whole or in part from that landlord.
(3) Where the relevant authority is not satisfied that the landlord is a fit and proper person to be the recipient of a payment of rent allowance no such payment shall be made direct to him under paragraph (1)."



When is the start of the 8 week rule?
Is is from the initial period of non payment of rent on the AST?
Or from the start of the LHA period?
It's for the tenancy period of the tenant's LHA claim. Also, there's no differentiation between a continuous 8 weeks of rent arrears or rent arrears accumulated over a period of time, as long as its for the same LHA claim.

For example, if AST started on 26 July 2009, and tenant made LHA claim; local authority were given tenancy info. (e.g. AST). If no rent was paid from tenancy start, then rental arrears would accumulate from 26 July 2009. Local authority is also obliged to make an interim payment within 14 days of the claim's acceptance. Also, even though tenant may be in 8 weeks rental arrears, local authority may take 4-5 weeks to investigate and process (e.g. send letter to tenant asking for proof of rent payments, etc.), so it maybe up to 12+ weeks before LL received direct payments (if authority found LL to be 'fit and proper')



So, where an AST is monthly is the tenant 8 weeks in arrears from the day of the second month of non-payment.No, because LHA is typically paid 4 weeks in arrears.


In my situation AST period from 26th to 25th month, LHA last payment period to 13th Sept

Payment due 26th August not paid
Payment due 26th Sept makes tenant two months in arrears

So, my question, on 26th Spetember if no payment received is the tenant 8 weeks in arrears?
It's the responsibility of the LL to keep an accurate record of all rental payments received. As is typical, the rental period does not coincide with LHA payment period.

You can work out the total rental arrears (in weeks) to date, as follows:

Total Rental Arrears(£) = Total Rent Due(£)* - Total Rent Received(£)*
Total Rental Arrears(Weeks) = Total Rental Arrears(£) / Weekly Rent(£)*

* = Known (or LL should know!)

[claret66]

Just to add a couple of points to the excellent detail given above.

In reality, LA's rarely make interim payments, particularly since the advent of LHA. This is because the claim does not count towards performance indicators until it is processed fully and if the claim has not been processed after 14 days it is usually awaiting a piece of information (e.g.income proof) needed to process it.

The LA has no need to write to the tenant once an 8-week arrears letter has been received from the landlord. This should suffice as proof of rent arrears without consulting the tenant/claimant.In reality, a lot of authorities do as they are afraid to make a decision! A better course of action would be for the LA to make future payments to landlord and give a right of appeal to the claimant, who could then submit contradictory evidence, if available. My advice would be to submit the arrears letter and then follow it up with a complaint a week later if the change has not been processed.

[RodCrosby]

Interesting post tom999

given the legislation you quote and with reference to my situation...
http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=161441#post161441

I believe the Council have made the wrong decision in my case.

All arrears, whether accrued during or before the time the T was in lawful receipt of LHA, should be paid from LHA, if available from the LHA excess, rather than awarding the T the weekly LHA excess.

Any lawyer agree?

[tom999]

All arrears, whether accrued during or before* the time the T was in lawful receipt of LHA, should be paid from LHA, if available from the LHA excess, rather than awarding the T the weekly LHA excess.

Any lawyer agree?
I'm not a lawyer, but I believe this is an incorrect interpretation of the above legislation.

* Council will not pay rent arrears to LL that are accrued before the LHA claim; i.e. council will pay LHA direct to LL if more than 8 weeks rent arrears, but will not pay LL arrears accumulated before this, so LL will make an 8 week rental loss (minimum) before direct LHA payments are made.

Also, your post: Debt recovery from skipped tenant on JSA (http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=161221&postcount=1), mentions: "The excuse was the tenant "said" he wasn't living there at the relevant time, and we have to go by what he says!"
Unfortunately this is often the case; as it's T's LHA claim, if T (falsely) states to council that they moved out on a certain date, council will believe T; its up to the LL to prove T was occupying property, during duration of claim, particularly when direct payments to LL are involved.

[RodCrosby]

I'm not a lawyer, but I believe this is an incorrect interpretation of the above legislation.
I accepted what the Council told me, but reading the Section 95 you quote above, I can find nothing to support it. On the contrary, in fact.




Also, your post: Debt recovery from skipped tenant on JSA (http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=161221&postcount=1), mentions: "The excuse was the tenant "said" he wasn't living there at the relevant time, and we have to go by what he says!"
Unfortunately this is often the case; as it's T's LHA claim, if T (falsely) states to council that they moved out on a certain date, council will believe T; its up to the LL to prove T was occupying property, during duration of claim, particularly when direct payments to LL are involved.
Again, I can find nothing in the legislation you kindly posted which supports that interpretation. In any event, wouldn't a District Judge awarding me the arrears in question in the County Court tend to refute the T's fibs to the Council!

To simplify the facts.
Tenant begins AST. [Date A]
Tenant stops paying rent [Date B]
Tenant, in attempt to evade CT, tells Council he is not living in property [Date C]
Tenant finally applies for LHA but only asks for it to be backdated to Date D, which is later than Date C.
By the time LHA is processed T is 17 weeks in arrears from Date B, and 12 weeks in arrears since Date D, so rent is paid direct to L. However the contractual rent is substantially below LHA, so Council also pays T maximum excess from Date D!
L queries with Council why excess is being paid to T. Council say they can only pay arrears to L from Date D.
District Judge awards L possession and outstanding arrears from Date B.
Tenant evicted.

[tom999]

I accepted what the Council told me, but reading the Section 95 you quote above, I can find nothing to support it. On the contrary, in fact.s.95 makes no mention of arrears accrued before LHA claim.


As a footnote to post #5, here is a thread with a similar topic regarding LHA overpayment (http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=18938).

It may help your case, if you had proof that the tenant occupied the property on certain date(s), e.g. statements from neighbours. Then ask council what proof they have that tenant moved out on the date claimed.

Also, please do not post on multiple threads as it confuses matters (stick to the one you started, as the Moderators of this forum do not like this), as you asked a similar question here (http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=161441&postcount=8).