[2023] UKUT 193 (AAC)

The claimant is a devout and observant Muslim. He sincerely and conscientiously believes that to charge or pay interest on a loan is forbidden by his faith. Those facts are not in dispute and, in any event, are amply supported by the evidence.

Until 24 June 2016, the claimant lived with his mother and his younger brother and sister in a rented property in the area administered by Gravesham.

Sadly, his mother died on that date leaving the claimant—who was then 19—to take on the tenancy and to assume legal responsibility for his brother and sister. To maintain the family, the claimant worked two jobs and claimed child benefit, child tax credit, and working tax credit.

He also claimed housing benefit from Gravesham and was awarded it from—at the latest—Monday 8 August 2016. Benefit was paid at the weekly rate of £109.05 from that date until Sunday 2 April 2017, and then at the weekly rate of £108.02 from Monday April 2017 to Sunday 3 December 2017. Those weekly rates represented his full weekly eligible rent.

I surmise—although the relevant documents were not before the Tribunal—that Gravesham suspended payment of benefit for from Monday 4 December 2017 under Part III of the Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2001. That decision was probably taken on Wednesday 29 November 2017 (see paragraph 26 below) so that the issues that led to the decision under appeal could be investigated.

Those issues arose because, in September 2016, the claimant had enrolled on a degree course at Queen Mary University of London ("QMUL").

These proceedings are concerned with Gravesham’s decisions in respect of the 2017/18 academic year.

On 4 September 2017, the student finance service awarded the claimant a non-repayable parents’ learning allowance of £1,617 for that academic year.

On 5 October 2017, QMUL awarded him a bursary (again non-repayable) of £1,571 for the same period.

Had he applied for them, the claimant would also have been entitled to student loans of £9,000 for his tuition fees and £12,114 for his maintenance. However, he did not apply for either loan because they are both repayable with interest and he conscientiously believed that his religion forbade him to pay interest.

That decision meant he had to pay his tuition fees himself and to maintain himself and his siblings from his savings and through part-time work, whilst also studying and looking after his family.

On 29 November 2017, Gravesham wrote to the claimant in response to a statement about his employment status that they had received the previous day. The Tribunal papers do not contain a copy of that statement. The letter asked for his P45 from a previous job, for his wage slips from a current job; for his bank statements for the preceding two months; and for:

“ Proof of your student income, for example notification of any bursary or loan entitlements (even if you have not taken a loan).”

The letter then ended:

“If you do not supply the information and documentation requested above within 14 days of the date of this letter, your claim will no longer be valid and will not be processed.”

The emphasis is original.

The claimant provided the required information, and on 23 January 2018, Gravesham made (at least) four decisions to the effect that:

the claimant was not entitled to housing benefit from 8 August 2016 to 3 December 2017;

the claimant was not entitled to housing benefit from and including Monday 4 December 2017;

the claimant had been overpaid £3,707.70 for the period from 8 August 2016 to Sunday 2 April 2017; and

the claimant had also been overpaid £3,780.70 for the period from Monday 3 April 2017 to 3 December 2017.