SH v London Borough of Southwark

Regulation 7(4) of the Housing Benefit Regulations 2006 applies only where essential repairs require the claimant to leave the home normally occupied and move into temporary accommodation. The question is not whether it would be reasonable for the claimant to live with a defect, but whether the repair work requires absence from the home.

The assessment is objective but takes account of the claimant’s individual circumstances, including vulnerability arising from ill health. The provision ceases to apply once no outstanding repair is both essential and incapable of completion while the claimant remains in occupation.

The claimant had moved from her secure tenancy to temporary accommodation in 2012 while the local authority carried out repairs. She remained liable for rent at the original property and received housing benefit.

The authority ended benefit in March 2019 on the basis that the essential repairs had been completed and that regulation 7(4) no longer applied. The First-tier Tribunal dismissed her appeal, finding that any later defects, including damage to garden fencing, did not require her to leave the property while repairs were performed.

The claimant appealed to the Upper Tribunal, principally contending that the tribunal had applied the wrong test and had insufficiently considered her mental health difficulties.

1. Appeal dismissed. The First-tier Tribunal had made no error of law in concluding that regulation 7(4) of the Housing Benefit Regulations 2006 had ceased to apply.

2. Regulation 7(4) requires a need for repairs, that the repairs be essential, and that their performance require the occupier to leave the home for temporary accommodation. It ceases to apply when there are no outstanding repairs that are both essential and incapable of being carried out while the occupier remains in residence.

3. The inquiry is objective, but it must take account of the claimant’s relevant individual characteristics, including impairment or vulnerability arising from ill health. The tribunal had considered the claimant’s agoraphobia, anxiety and depression and had not overlooked the medical evidence.

4. The First-tier Tribunal correctly addressed whether repair of the external fence would require the claimant to move out, rather than whether it would be reasonable for her to live at the property while the fence remained unrepaired. On the evidence, the straightforward external repair could be completed with her in occupation.

5. The tribunal was entitled to rely on the available repair records and surveyor’s evidence. The absence of a final post-works inspection did not prevent it from making findings that the earlier essential repairs had been completed and that subsequent defects were minor or could be repaired in occupation. Regulation 7(13) could not assist because the claimant’s absence had far exceeded its thirteen-week limit.

• Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber): dismissed the claimant’s appeal and upheld the First-tier Tribunal’s conclusion that housing benefit was not payable from 24 March 2019.
• First-tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber): on 9 November 2020 dismissed the claimant’s appeal against the local authority’s decision to end housing benefit.