Login FormClose

Free ESA, PIP and DLA Updates

With over 140,000 subscribers our fortnightly updates bulletin is the UK's leading source of benefits news. Get the facts about what's changing, how it affects you and how to prepare.   Get your free benefits updates now.

Professional Members

We support both claimants and professionals.  These are just some of the organisations who have subscribed to Benefits and Work:

  • Royal College of Nursing
  • Spinal Injuries Association
  • Chesterfield Law Centre
  • Coventry Mind
  • Birmingham Citizens Advice Bureau
  • Colchester Borough Council Welfare Rights

Read more

DWP refuses to admit defeat over bedroom tax

The DWP is to continue to hound the carers of a severely disabled teenager who won their case against being forced to pay the bedroom tax in the Court of Appeal yesterday. The DWP have said they will not accept the court’s decision and instead will take the case to the Supreme Court.

Paul and Susan Rutherford – themselves disabled - look after their severely disabled grandson, Warren, in their specially adapted home.

They have an additional bedroom in their home for carers who stay overnight twice a week to give Paul and Susan some respite. By caring for their grandson at home the Rutherfords save the taxpayer the massive cost of residential care for Warren.

But, in spite of David Cameron insisting in July 2013 that:

“Anyone who needs to have a carer sleeping in another bedroom is exempt from the spare room subsidy.”

the Rutherford’s have been hit by the bedroom tax. This is because a spare room for carers is only permitted if it is the claimant or their partner who needs a carer, not if it is a disabled child.

When they applied to their local council for a discretionary housing payment the Rutherfords were initially refused that on the grounds that they should use Warren’s DLA to pay for the shortfall in their rent.

Yesterday the Court of Appeal held that the DWP had unlawfully discriminated against the Rutherfords and against another claimant who has a panic room installed in her home.

The decision by the DWP to appeal the case to the supreme court means many more months of worry and uncertainty for the Rutherfords.

Comments  

#14 Bill24chev 2016-02-22 18:52
Quote:
Hi dont know if any one can answer this for me but does any one know when i will stop paying the bedroom tax i am 60 and my partner who is my full time carer is 63 this year, been trying for 3years to move but no success
Amend my last post

it seems that exemption is for those in receipt of Pension Credit
I believe the rules are changing ,due to roll out of UC, so pension credit will be paid on the younger member of a couple reaching pension credit age.

So exemption will be when you reach that date
#13 Bill24chev 2016-02-22 18:45
Quote:
Hi dont know if any one can answer this for me but does any one know when i will stop paying the bedroom tax i am 60 and my partner who is my full time carer is 63 this year, been trying for 3years to move but no success
If OAP's are still exempt Ii would think when your partner reaches state pension age.

bill
#12 angela 2016-02-19 08:38
Hi dont know if any one can answer this for me but does any one know when i will stop paying the bedroom tax i am 60 and my partner who is my full time carer is 63 this year, been trying for 3years to move but no success
+1 #11 Shitmagnet55 2016-02-04 18:29
Absolutely abhorrent, indefensible behaviour! Why? How the hell is hounding the sick classed as a job???
+1 #10 melrose 2016-02-01 08:57
And yet meanwhile.... George Osbourne is going into battle with the EU who are trying to stop Bermuda from being a tax haven. Seriously... I am not making that up. Our government is continuing to persecute the sick and disabled, even chasing them through the courts and when they lose, they change the law, yet they are fighting to the bitter end to defend the rights of the big corporations and the rich folks just like themselves to continue to use their tax havens. They really meant it when they said they were all in it together!
+1 #9 Eli48 2016-01-28 21:02
Quoting satmanbasil:
Thinking the government would be better off stop wasting public money in fighting the decisions in court and set up assistantance to local councils to get to the bottom of housing, I live next door to a pensioner who lives alone in a 3 bed room house there must be a better way to allow people to exchange property upsize/downsize without all the red tape that goes with it. Alot of local councils seem to only monitor the exchange program without taking the leading role by putting local people in touch with one another about the possibility of exchange, most people do not wish to move away from there area and by making local people aware whats available for exchange could help move the process along.


What if the pensioner bought the house and does not want to move. It has been his home and maybe his dead spouses home for decades and holds memories he wants to keep? He should not have to sell up and move just to suit you or the government, the same government who have not invested in affordable housing, allow too many to buy a second home (including MP's, ) that they hardly use, overseas investors to buy up huge stock, just to let it suit and make money. Why the hell should ordinary people pay for that?
+2 #8 thedragon 2016-01-28 19:53
It makes me so mad when they continue with the persecution. The MPs in the meantime have their 'second' houses paid for. I wonder how many 'spare' bedrooms they have?

I read recently that Cameron has made £500,000 by renting out his home. Surely this should be paid as rent for No. 10?
+2 #7 Blackcat 2016-01-28 18:48
This is a brilliant result!! I just hope that the people involved keep as calm as possible and plod on with it. If they win again Oh boy will they make somebody look stupid. Keep going ,just keep going. Confidence is high.
+4 #6 MarkW 2016-01-28 13:58
Angela is right, this G'ment make us all sick, and the already sick sicker!
They have no humanity, no feelings for others, and no care in the world for the disabled!
+3 #5 buster 2016-01-28 13:09
Well done to the Rutherford's. they have put their heads above the parapet and surely must have sacrificed so much over the last few years as a result of battling for social justice - for themselves and other affected families. They deserve enormous credit for their actions - God bless them.

As for the DWP - what an utter disgrace they are; why can't they just accept that their bedroom tax policy has been judged to be illegal by experts looking at case studies? Why make the Rutherford's and other families suffer even more? Is there not just a tiny smidgen of compassion and decency within the DWP and IDS in particular that will force them to reconsider their current heartless position?

And the same goes for the Rutherford's local council - what an absolute disgrace they are too; by suggesting the Rutherford's should use their disabled grandchild's DLA payments to pay towards their bedroom tax - well that's just bloody unbelievable - and it's not even a Tory run council, apparently it's led by independents.

Buster
#4 satmanbasil 2016-01-28 12:29
Thinking the government would be better off stop wasting public money in fighting the decisions in court and set up assistantance to local councils to get to the bottom of housing, I live next door to a pensioner who lives alone in a 3 bed room house there must be a better way to allow people to exchange property upsize/downsize without all the red tape that goes with it. Alot of local councils seem to only monitor the exchange program without taking the leading role by putting local people in touch with one another about the possibility of exchange, most people do not wish to move away from there area and by making local people aware whats available for exchange could help move the process along.
+4 #3 cossack 2016-01-28 11:18
I would suggest that 'disgusting' would be an appropriate word Angela. Where's the common sense in any of this ?! The system seems so flawed.
+4 #2 SusanH 2016-01-28 10:09
Perhaps their (the DWP) plan is to procrastinate by constantly appealing, until the child (15 at the moment) is himself an adult and therefore the claimee in his own right.

It would be a sneaky way of winning and quashing a potential legal precedent.
+4 #1 angela 2016-01-28 09:30
I cant think of a word low enough to use for this goverment it makes me sick

You need to be logged in to comment