Four out of five appeals brought with the assistance of Fife Law Centre have been upheld.

The rulings have provoked fierce debate in the sector as to the extent to which tribunals will take room size and intended use into account when assessing councils’ housing benefit awards. The rulings raise questions about the extent to which councils should rely on housing association data when deciding what a bedroom is for the purposes of the under-occupation penalty.

Inside Housing has now obtained all five rulings and has summarised the main points below.

1) APPELLANT: Name withheld upon request by claimant

The basis of the appeal:

Brought by a man living alone in his former family home, which has three rooms originally judged as ‘bedrooms’ including a ‘boxroom’

He is disabled having lost his left leg above the knee four years ago.

He said he needed one of the other bedrooms because his sons come to stay overnight to care for him when he is in discomfort. This was accepted by the council in April – meaning he was only deemed to be underoccupying by one room.

He said he is waiting to hear from his occupational therapist about converting the ‘boxroom’ into a wetroom as his bathroom is too small for him to use.

The claimant’s legal representative argued that the boxroom was too small at 64 square feet to be classified as a bedroom – as space standards in the Housing Act (Scotland) 1987 state a room of between 50 and 70 square feet should only be sufficient for a child under the age of 10. Also, because welfare reform minister Lord Freud has suggested tenants hit by the bedroom tax take in lodgers, the appellant argued that the room should only be classified as a bedroom if it is big enough for a lodger.

The appellant also argued that the room was needed to store equipment he needs for his disability, including an exercise bike, walking and ‘mirror’ device. He therefore argued the established use of the room was not as a bedroom.

The ruling:

Tribunal chair Simon Collins QC accepted the first part of the appellant’s argument, that it is ‘relevant to have regard to statutory space standards’. However he rejected the argument that the boxroom was needed to store equipment, saying the equipment could be stored in the second largest bedroom.

Verdict: APPEAL ALLOWED

2) APPELLANT: DAVID NELSON

Basis of the appeal:

The appellant and his wife live in a three bedroom property. One room has been acknowledged as necessary for an overnight carer, as Mr Nelson is disabled. The other room, a ‘boxroom’ was under dispute.

The appellant argued the room, at 66.3 square feet, was too small to be classified as a bedroom with regard to the space standards in the Housing Act (Scotland) 1987.

It was also argued that Mr Nelson’s room is used to store equipment he needs for his disability  and therefore its established use is not as a bedroom.

Thirdly, Mr Nelson argued that he needs to keep the bathroom door open due to his (unspecified) disability. This room faces the boxroom, which meant ‘obliging the appellant to take in a lodger would compromise the appellant’s dignity’.

The ruling:

Mr Collins again accepted the space standards argument, that the boxroom was too small to be used as an adult bedroom.

However, he rejected the other arguments, saying he was ‘not satisfied’ that the disability equipment could not be stored elsewhere in the property. He also rejected the argument about Mr Nelson’s dignity due to the door being left open, saying ‘a bedroom…does not cease to be a bedroom because the appellant is using a nearby bathroom with the door open.’

Verdict: APPEAL ALLOWED

3) APPELLANT: LOUISE MCLEARY

Basis of the appeal:

Ms McLeary is blind, and lives alone in a three bedroom property owned by Kingdom Housing Associaiton.

She was assessed as needing a three bedroom house, and receives a package of support from KHA under contract from Fife Council.

Ms McLeary’s legal representative argued that she was living in exempt accommodation, so her rent is not determined in accordance with the ‘bedroom tax’ rules in the housing benefit regulations.

Instead, Ms McLeary argued that under the Consequential Provisions Regulations 2006, exempt accommodation ‘includes accommodation which is provided by…a housing association…where that body…also provides the claimant with care, support or supervision.’

The council argued that KHA is not obliged to provide the support as it is not in Ms McLeary’s tenancy agreement, so the exempt accommodation rules don’t apply.

The ruling:
Mr Collins rejected the council’s argument, saying there is no requirement that the care provision ‘must be pursuant to a contractual obligation to the claimant.’

Verdict: APPEAL ALLOWED

Please share!

FAMILIES affected by the so-called “bedroom tax” and other welfare reforms could be forced to wait more than 10 years for a suitable home, a council has warned.

The same Yorkshire authority, which has to slash £48m from its budget over the next two years, is also facing a potential shortfall in rent payments of £2.8m a year as the true impact of austerity and the Government’s welfare reforms is laid bare.

Of those tenants not previously in arrears prior to the introduction of the bedroom tax, or under-occupancy penalty – which sees cuts to housing benefit for tenants deemed to have spare rooms – less than half (45 per cent) in Hull, have paid the 14 to 25 per cent contribution they have lost.

The Labour-led city council – which has now received more than 53,000 calls to a benefits advice hotline set up in April – is also warning of increased homelessness and says that even basic services may be cut or disappear all together.

About 4,500 working age tenants in the city are affected by the bedroom tax, while 3,000 households live in overcrowded council accommodation, and 2,600 are “under-occupying” and require a one-bedroom property.

A report going before councillors next week says: “To move all households impacted to the ‘right size’ of home to match their benefit entitlement is projected to take well in excess of 10 years.”

Deputy council leader Daren Hale said: “Clearly, what the report reflects is the fact that welfare reform, which is very politically motivated, is obviously having disproportionate effects on those areas of greatest need like Hull.

“As well as local authority reductions in funding, the reforms are having a significantly higher impact in places like Hull so you’ve got a double whammy and it’s a case of trying to support people in need as they experience cuts to their benefits.

“We are then left with the unpleasant situation of having to collect that money (rent and council tax), because if we don’t it leaves a shortfall in service areas, whether housing repairs, or services getting reduced further.

“It puts us in the position of being the bad guys when really these are Government-enforced.

“We are not under any illusions – this is going to have a drastic effect, not just the bedroom tax and changes to council tax.

“We are also seeing a migrating inwards of families with multiple issues and needs into urban areas because the housing they have to pay towards is cheaper, and there’s a significant influx of families as part of this process. That’s into the city and within the city.”

He added: “Government spending figures show the level of reduction per head of population is four times higher than it is in the East Riding, and the East Riding hasn’t had it good either.

“We’ve got to hope there’s an announcement around things like Siemens (possible investment in manufacturing); we need to see growth in some of these new technology areas.

“The burden of public sector reduction has fallen grossly unfairly on local government. By far and away the largest budget reduction has fallen on the local government family.

“It’s just unsustainable going forward. People will start to see the basic services they rely on either aren’t there or are significantly reduced.”

Measures the council is developing to tackle the housing crisis include shared tenancies and “space saving equipment”, which would see partition walls or screens fitted in bedrooms which children of extreme age gaps are forced to share.

The report says the council will only evict tenants in arrears as a last resort when all other options have been exhausted.

Less than half a per cent of tenancies ended in eviction in 2012/13.

Council leader Stephen Brady said: “I just think the social impact of this is not going to be seen until the next two or three years.

“All councils up and down the country are dealing with this difficult situation. God knows what it’s like in London.

“You always have to try and do your best in the circumstances.”

Nick Clegg was left stuck for words after being confronted by a seriously ill lady who is being hit by the Bedroom Tax.

Karen in Basildon phoned in to Call Clegg to complain about the Spare Room Subsidy, which means that she is paying £16 per week extra, despite needing the extra room for her oxygen concentrators.

She has been told she should move the devices to her bedroom, but insists they are so loud, they would stop her and her husband sleeping.

Unfortunately I can’t find the specific clip, only the whole half hour show on Youtube, but this call is about 17 minutes in.

I’m not going to pretend to agree with Simon Stevens’ views on anything. I’ve had a bit of a run-in with him myself when he called me disablist because of my views on I’m Spazticus.

I now realise that is nothing compared to the run-ins he has had with others.

I wish he could see that he is entitled to do, and to think, what he likes- but so  is everyone else. Personal criticism is never necessary.

The paralysed man in charge of assessing benefit claimants has said the UK expects too little of disabled people.

Dr Stephen Duckworth, who broke his neck during a rugby accident 33 years ago, said society is letting down the disabled by not demanding a contribution from them.

The 53-year-old now leads the team that  will assess those who apply for the personal  independence payments, which will replace the disability living allowance.

Dr Duckworth said: ‘We need to move to a culture where employers recognise employment is therapeutic as opposed to illness-creating.

‘It is far better to go back to work to get better than to wait to get better to get back to work. Use work as a therapeutic intervention.’

Dr Duckworth – who trained himself to breathe by using his diaphragm rather than his chest muscles – believes more than 20 per cent of  Britain’s five million disabled have wrongly become dependent on benefits.

He said ‘at least a million, probably north of a million’ of those ‘deemed to be disabled… have got there through system failure and the way society is organised’.

The father of four – who receives DLA himself and will be assessed for the new benefit – said that minor injuries had become ‘a very common avenue towards multiple benefit receipt’.

In an interview, he details a claimant’s possible path after an accident ‘that could have happened at work as a result of lifting a box of photocopy paper’.

He says: ‘It gave you a bit of a limp; you get a no-win, no-fee solicitor, a claims farmer, coming up to you.’

As a result, he continues: ‘You get, say, £6,000 in damages from your employers, that builds your impairment, you’re off work for six months, then drop from full pay to half pay, then statutory sick pay.’

After which, Dr Duckworth says ‘you’re feeling the financial pinch’, and he envisages the claimant realising he can get an enhanced income from employment support allowance, and going on to claim it.

The scenario, he says, is: ‘Do my work capability assessment, get signed off on to the employment and support allowance at £106, so have a bit to pay the loan sharks back, [but] I am depressed and my partner has left me… my life is falling apart.’

Dr Duckworth, who served on the board of the Olympic Delivery Authority for London 2012, was suicidal after being paralysed as a medical student, but he refused his parents’ offer to look after him.

He said: ‘When I broke my neck, my mum and dad said, “Don’t worry, Stephen, we will build you a granny annexe”, and I screamed until I was blue in the face.

‘If they had built me one I would still be living there, they’d have wrapped me  in cotton wool and I’d never have got  back to London.’