[2024] UKUT 261 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber

[2024] UKUT 261 (AAC)

Fecha: 28-Ago-2024

The Appellant’s appeal to the Upper Tribunal

The Appellant’s appeal to the Upper Tribunal

18.

The Appellant appealed to the Upper Tribunal against both of the FTT decisions. Her appeal against the FTT’s entitlement decision was expressed in the following terms:

I am entitled to full Housing Benefit since September 2021 due to a three-year course my daughter has started, coming home for more than the legal allowance of at least 13-14 weeks as she comes on festivals and weekends as well as holidays and my home is her main home which she intends to stay at after her course. The absence away from home was temporary for study purpose not as main home.

19.

The Secretary of State’s representative does not support the appeal to the Upper Tribunal. The Secretary of State takes the same approach as the DWP decision-maker at first instance and the FTT: “In this case the daughter spent three times as much time at the Manchester address as at her mother’s address. Consequently I submit that she normally lived at the Manchester address” (Secretary of State’s submission at paragraph 13). The Secretary of State’s representative also adds that “students who rent a house on a joint tenancy are liable for Council Tax. However, they pay no Council Tax as a consequence of the exemptions. They will however receive a Council Tax notice for zero. As these joint tenancies are not restricted to term time occupation only if for a year, this is why those in Halls might be considered to reside normally with their parents still and be just temporarily absent, while those who take tenancies might not be considered to reside with their parents as they have a main home elsewhere on which they are liable for Council Tax” (paragraph 15).

20.

I simply observe at this juncture that the FTT appears not to have explored or made any findings of fact as to the nature of the daughter’s occupancy in Manchester. It is entirely unclear from the statement of reasons as to the basis of A’s residence in Manchester. The Secretary of State’s representative appears to assume that the Appellant’s daughter had her own (sole or shared) tenancy in the private rented sector in Manchester. In that context it may well be significant that – as the Appellant states in her reply to the Secretary of State’s response to her appeal – “[A] was in halls and even they closed during holidays … Temporary tenancies such a student halls do not require students to pay council tax and are referred to as temporarily absent from their main address with family.”