Does a 2nd tenancy supersede the first?Make Text Bigger
I have a tenant on LHA in a 3 bed property rented for £695 since 2010
The Council sent a payment for approx £50 less stating reason as deductions for non dependent. I phoned the council and they said the son had turned 18 and left college in July hence the deductions and they will be claiming the overpayment going back to July.
I contacted the tenant and informed him of this advising that he will need to pay an extra £50 pcm. The tenant is unable to find this money, but wishes to stay in property and keep his family together. I read an article that you can put two separate claims in one for son and one for the rest of the household which consists of parents and daughter of 20 .
I spoke with tenant and asked him to contact shelter to confirm if this was indeed correct. He advises me yes it is.
I then created two tenancies (six months) one for the son on room rate at £65 per week one for the rest of the family at £525 two bed LHA rate
Tenant wrote a letter explaining the reason for the two tenancies and took them down to the council. They accepted them and told him everything looked fine.
Eight weeks later the son receives letter informing him the claim is not valid as non dependant. Council pay the other tenancy at £525 less deductions so actually receiving £441
The Council Tax department charge me a 100% council tax at 126 pcm d/d setup
I Spoke with another landlord who informs me that the tenancy needed to be in the father and sons name. Advised to leave a break of 7 days then put in a new tenancy. This was done and a new tenancy for £850 pcm was given to the council Jan 8th.
I informed the council tax dept and they revert the council tax back to tenant at 20%. Housing benefit dept refuse to accept the new tenancy as the existing one is for six months . They will only pay the two bed rate until the six months is up.
I am being advised this is not correct as the second tenancy supersedes the first .
As the council tax as now been reverted back to the tenant I expected them to just go back to paying £600 three bed rate.
It appears now they should not have made deductions in the first place as the son was on job seekers, if this had not happened then the original tenancy would have remained the same.
Please can someone clarify what the legal standing is on the tenancies.
If I served section 21 on the first two tenancies if I went to court with this would the judge say the second tenancy is in forced?
Please Log-In OR Become a member to reply to comments or subscribe to new comment notifications.