Bizarre Housing Benefit scenario – is this legal?

The man you need to speak to is Bill Irvine at ucadvice.co.uk (07733 080389). He will cut through the BS as he knows the system better than the donkeys running the show.

"He is now in a situation whereby his daughter’s accommodation is no longer financially sustainable after the demise of her parents"
Is this an AI generated post because surely, if her parents are now dead, how can the father be having any problems with the council? Isn't he dead?
Before the parents died they must have made provisions for her in their will.
"unless the parent’s house can be sold and the funds used to pay the extra rent for the rest of the daughter’s life." Why wouldn't it? Surely that was the plan along? Afterall, doesn't she now own two properties, having presumably inherited the bungalow she lives in. In which case, why would she be paying rent and who to?
"is this legal?"
The best people to ask are the Benefits Fraud people.

Steve

The graphic with the man scratching his head is most appropriate.

As the tenant is a disabled daughter, Universal Credit would administer her housing costs, not the local council.

It's up to the landlord and tenant to determine the rent, not the local council. If as you suggest, the amount of rent is based on the 2-bed rate of LHA there would be no need to increase the rent to a level that's unaffordable.

You say the "parents" are dead but the father is contesting things with the local council???

Quite a few things are not right about the scenario you paint.

Please clarify.

Bill

My tenants pay the 3 bed rate of LHA for a 4 bed house.

Absolutely nothing to do with the jobsworths at the Council. Reduce the rent now.

Reply to the comment left by Bill irvine at 07/03/2025 - 12:00
I won't get into semantics, but isn't it the local authority that sets the LHA, via the Valuation Office? In our area, it is also the local council that directly funds any difference between actual rent and the local LHA.
I can see one scenario that would involve an increase in rent, but it isn't (directly) related to the LHA, UC or the local council.
If the daughter was living in a property while paying a rent that was substantially below market rent, couldn't HMRC rule that she is effectively a part-owner? Or that the father was effectively supporting her financially (which would be eligible for IHT upon his death as a gift) or that he was underreporting his income from property? Perhaps the property was set up as a trust, in which case the daughter has to pay full market rent otherwise there is the possibility that the trust could be ruled inadmissible by HMRC. Buying the property in a trust would avoid complications of charging your own daughter Housing Benefit (is that even possible?)
It sounds as if the father has tried to weave a convoluted web in order to maximise the benefits his family receive. I am also wondering if the father isn't actually the 'Guest author' and is trying to get some free advice on what happens to his scheme when he dies.
Hence my suggestion of the 'Arnaud Amalric' method of tax dodging - "report them, HMRC knows which money is theirs"

Reply to the comment left by Cider Drinker at 07/03/2025 - 12:23
I doubt your tenants are your children.

Thanks for your comments. To clarify; the father discussed this with me as my wife and I have also bought a property for my disabled son to live in, and he shares that property with another young man with a disability. Hence, I have some experience in claiming HB.

Both parents of the young lady in question are still alive, but they are now concerned as to what happens upon their demise, as they clearly will then not be around to fund their daughters rent deficit. I thought that was clear from my description, but obviously it wasn’t! Perhaps I should have written “…after the future demise of her parents”, or similar. Hope this clarifies the situation.

Hi Steve
It's the Rent Officer Service, within the VOA, that sets the Local Housing Allowance. Councils simply publish and apply the levels, pitched at the 30th percentile of Market Rents for that area.
The Council operates the Housing Benefit scheme nowadays for claimants of pensionable age or those in Exempt Accommodation.
Whereas, from April 2013 responsibility for all new claims for "housing costs" transferred to DWP. Those already receiving HB at that point, under pensionable age, were able to continue claiming HB as long as their circumstances didn't change or they received a notification from DWP migrating them over to UC.
Councils continue to administer the "Discretionary Housing Payments" scheme for both HB and UC "housing costs" recipients where their award is less than the potential LHA rate.
In terms of the level of rental charge, there is a body of caselaw that supports the fact the LHA rate is a perfectly acceptable level of charge to apply. That doesn't limit the landlord's options, as some charge slightly higher where the tenant has extra income from earnings or disability benefits, like PIP/DLA.
HMRC has no role to play in determining the level of charge.
I deal with family-related tenancy disputes, both with councils HB departments and DWP (Universal Credit) every week. See latest website bulletin https://universalcreditadvice.com/articles/dwp-malpractice-of-denying-housing-costs-in-close-family-tenancies/
Bill

"they clearly will then not be around to fund their daughters rent deficit"
Why wouldn't their daughter, or your own child, have been left both properties in the will. In which case, to whom would either of them be paying rent?

Reply to the comment left by Bill irvine at 07/03/2025 - 12:55
Thanks for clarifying the first bit.
Isn't this potentially more complicated by the fact that this daughter is 'renting' a three-bed, while only entitled to a two-bed?
If, as I suspect, the property is held in a trust, then there could well be a difference between "full market rent" as considered by HMRC and LHA.
Of course it is HMRC that is relevant body in such circumstances, even the Duke of Devonshire has to pay the full market rent on Chatsworth House, otherwise his trust will be deemed invalid. It is also HMRC that would decide the level of IHT payable on the parent's death.
Surely the parents must have set up a trust to look after the daughter's needs after their death?