Post by Patrick Torsney on Jan 28, 2011 13:26:06 GMT 1
This is a recent case kindly provided by Gloucester Law Centre. It demonstrates the kind of legal work that would no longer be able to be carried out by the Centre, and other legal aid providers, should the legal aid reform proposals go ahead as planned. The reform proposals say that clients would be able to deal with this kind of thing themselves - that legal advice is simply not necessary for problems with benefits - that this kind of advice is "mechanical"
Names have been anonymised
Ms G was referred to the Law Centre by a Tribunal Judge for advice on a complicated housing benefit matter.
The client and partner purchased a property whilst both working, although they could not obtain a mortgage so the client’s parents re-mortgaged their own home and purchased a property for them with the mortgage advance.
As Ms G’s parents are retired and could not afford the mortgage repayments the parties entered into a trust deed providing that the client and partner could occupy the property provided they met the monthly repayments on the remortgage. Unfortunately the Client and partner subsequently became unemployed and claimed Jobseekers Allowance.
They attempted to claim help with their housing costs either through housing benefit (HB) or DWP housing costs. However the claim for housing benefit was refused by the local authority, whilst the DWP refused to even accept a claim for help with housing costs.
Ms G appealed the HB decision and at the Tribunal hearing the Judge adjourned the case and referred the client to the Law Centre for assistance, requesting a submission on the application of the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996.
We helped Ms G to pursue both the HB appeal and also a DWP claim in the alternative. The Judge has reserved the HB decision which is still awaited but, in the meantime, the DWP have accepted our submission, quoting Upper Tribunal authority, that the payments can be met by them, and our clients have received £6000 in arrears payments and ongoing payments and will not now have to sell the house.
As they have a young child they would, if forced to sell, have applied to the local authority for homeless assistance as an unintentionally homeless family in priority need and been eligible for assistance. Our intervention therefore saved considerable amounts of public money for a very modest cost.
Names have been anonymised
Ms G was referred to the Law Centre by a Tribunal Judge for advice on a complicated housing benefit matter.
The client and partner purchased a property whilst both working, although they could not obtain a mortgage so the client’s parents re-mortgaged their own home and purchased a property for them with the mortgage advance.
As Ms G’s parents are retired and could not afford the mortgage repayments the parties entered into a trust deed providing that the client and partner could occupy the property provided they met the monthly repayments on the remortgage. Unfortunately the Client and partner subsequently became unemployed and claimed Jobseekers Allowance.
They attempted to claim help with their housing costs either through housing benefit (HB) or DWP housing costs. However the claim for housing benefit was refused by the local authority, whilst the DWP refused to even accept a claim for help with housing costs.
Ms G appealed the HB decision and at the Tribunal hearing the Judge adjourned the case and referred the client to the Law Centre for assistance, requesting a submission on the application of the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996.
We helped Ms G to pursue both the HB appeal and also a DWP claim in the alternative. The Judge has reserved the HB decision which is still awaited but, in the meantime, the DWP have accepted our submission, quoting Upper Tribunal authority, that the payments can be met by them, and our clients have received £6000 in arrears payments and ongoing payments and will not now have to sell the house.
As they have a young child they would, if forced to sell, have applied to the local authority for homeless assistance as an unintentionally homeless family in priority need and been eligible for assistance. Our intervention therefore saved considerable amounts of public money for a very modest cost.