Claimants send pre-action letter to DWP over 'bedroom tax'

Claimants have sent a letter before action to Work and Pensions Secretary Ian Duncan Smith warning of potential legal action over the Government’s so-called ‘bedroom tax’.

Law firm Leigh Day, which is acting on behalf of two disabled clients, claimed that new housing benefit regulations were discriminatory.

The threatened legal action relates to new regulation B13 introduced into the Housing Benefit Regulations 2006.

The change, due to come into force on 1 April, would see a single person or a couple with no children having their housing benefit reduced by 14% where they occupy a two-bedroom home and by 25% if they occupy a home with three or more bedrooms.

The claimants are Jacqueline Carmichael and Richard Rourke, who the law firm said could not afford to make up the 14% reductions that would apply in their cases.

Mrs Carmichael, who has spina bifida, lives with her husband in a two-bedroom housing association flat.

Leigh Day said her condition means she has to sleep in a hospital bed and in a fixed position. The bed is not large enough for two people, and there is insufficient space in the bedroom for another bed.

Mr Rourke, a disabled widower, meanwhile lives in a three-bedroom council bungalow.

His stepdaughter is also disabled, with a rare form of muscular dystrophy. She is currently studying at university and returns home during holidays and weekends when she can.

Leigh Day said a third bedroom, as defined by the Government, in Mr Rourke’s home was a box room measuring 8 x 9 feet in which he stored equipment such as a hoist for lifting him, his power chair and his shower seat.

It added that the claimant had asked in the social rented sector about the availability of two bedroom properties, which were suitable for wheelchair use, and found that there were none.

Leigh Day lawyer Ugo Hayter said: “This is a very poor piece of legislation which will have a devastating effect on our clients and many thousands of others. This change to housing benefit is causing great distress and uncertainty for the most vulnerable in society. 

“If this legislation is not withdrawn we fully intend to take it to the High Court for a judicial review as we believe it is discriminatory.”