1) Mr. John lives with his partner. He is not responsible for the rent but does housekeeping, pays the council tax and does general shopping for the house and both him and his partner are in receipt of Housing Benefit. Is his claim fraudulent? Explain in depth.
Housing benefit fraud is a common crime that many individuals in the UK engage in; it involves one enjoying state benefits especially for housing services they are not entitled to or intentionally failing to report an alteration in their personal state of affairs. Based on the context of Mr. John and his partner his claim is fraudulent because he is living with his partner who is also entitled to Housing Benefit. This has an implication that the state is spending money for both of them as though they are in separate apartments yet they stay together. This is a deliberate form of withholding information that affects Mr. John's claim of the Housing Benefit and therefore literary speaking this is a dishonest act or virtually stealing from the state. Given that he lives with his partner, who is probably responsible for the housing expenditure it becomes definite that his claim for the benefit is fraudulent (King, 2009, p.122).
2) Ms Mary is a 2nd year full time student at the University of Manchester, and is in receipt of income support. She has put in a claim for Housing Benefit. Will her claim be approved? Give reasons for your answer.
There are policies set to guide on the way students can apply for the housing benefits in the UK and if one does not comply with the set standards, he or she will not be entitled to the housing benefits offered. Most full time students are not given housing benefits but there are exemptions for those who can have access to such benefits. Ms. Mary's claim will be approved because she has an income receipt support and based on the policies laid down concerning the housing benefits any student that has income support is liable to get housing benefit. Although most full time students are not usually given housing benefits, Ms Mary lies in the category of those who can be exempted and be given allowances so that she can pay rent.
3) From the 24th of July 1996, only Port applicant asylum seekers are allowed to claim housing benefit. Discuss.
Port applicant asylum seekers were allowed to access the housing benefits in the UK so as to ensure that only individuals who follow the right policies in the attainment of UK protection enjoy social benefits. This was an important step in the prevention of illegal immigrants in the UK. This was also used in the enhancement of security, prevention of terrorism and also the facilitation of proper accounting for the expenditure on the housing and other social benefits. It was noted previously that UK was having many ghost workers who were evading tax payments. This was among the causes of financial crisis which was brought forth by the increased government expenditure on the illegal immigrants; who also enjoyed housing and council tax benefits. The amendment of 24th July 1996 was of great significance as it facilitated economic growth and proper fiscal accountability (King, 2009, p.125).
4) Yusuf Mohammed is a port applicant asylum seeker from the 3rd of April 2002; on the 30th of March 2009 he received his first Negative decision from the home office regarding his asylum. Explain the impact the home office's decision will have on his housing benefit claim.
The housing benefits ought to be given to Yusuf Mohammed by the home office because the amendments on the changes in the policies regarding the provision of benefits to the port asylum applicants. The impact of the home office on his application will be termination of his housing benefits because he could not have complied with the laid out strategic formulations that were to be adopted in the application for the housing benefits. This has an insinuation that for Yusuf Mohammed to have access to the social benefits and housing benefits he will have to re-apply based on the amendments of April 2002.