Deprivation of Capital

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #287600
    craigworc
    Participant

    Hi, we have a case where a pensioner has claimed HB from May 2024.

    On his form he disclosed some accounts that indicated he had over £16k in capital. We wrote and asked him to clarify the amount as having over £16k would nil him and he provided evidence that he has closed one of the accounts a few months ago and he now has under £16k. That’s fine, I am happy with that.

    This is the bit I’m not happy with. He also has interest in a 2nd property that his ex-wife lives in, she is also a pensioner who has a daughter with mental health issues. We sent out an LA 1 to him to complete. We have had various issues with him, saying he can’t download the form etc. etc. Now, he is saying that he does’t need to complete it as he has decided that he is going to sign over his half of the house to his ex-partner. This decision seems to have been made once we advised him about the £16k limit.

    At no point during the application process did he say his was his intention. For me this is clearly deprivation but does anyone know of any case law of similar cases that will support this decison.

    Thanks

    Craig

    #287604
    helevans
    Participant

    Hello – would you not look to disregard the value of his property capital on the basis that the property is occupied by a close relative (assuming the daughter is his biological or step daughter?) who is incapacitated?

    #287605
    John Boxall
    Participant

    You need to go through Schedule 6

    As far as I can see as its his ex wife then it DOESNT fall to be disregarded assuming she’s the ‘occupant’

    Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery. The blossom is blighted, the leaf is withered, the god of day goes down upon the dreary scene, and—and in short you are for ever floored.

    Wilkins Micawber, Ch12 David Copperfield

    #287606
    helevans
    Participant

    Hello –

    any premises occupier in whole or in part –

    (a) by a partner or relative of a single claimant or any member of the family as his home where that person has attained the qualifying age for state pension credit or is incapacitated

    the daughter is occupying the property as her home – so the disregard would be applicable?

    #287608
    craigworc
    Participant

    Sorry, should have said, the daugther doesn’t appear to be his … ‘my ex-partner is living there with her 44 year old daughter’ so for me this wouldn’t apply?

    #287609
    John Boxall
    Participant

    But…………..
    (b) by the former partner of the claimant as his home; but this provision shall not apply where the former partner is a person from whom the claimant is estranged or divorced or with whom he had formed a civil partnership that has been dissolved.

    Touche!

    Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery. The blossom is blighted, the leaf is withered, the god of day goes down upon the dreary scene, and—and in short you are for ever floored.

    Wilkins Micawber, Ch12 David Copperfield

    #287611
    helevans
    Participant

    Ah, ignore me then craigworc – going down the wrong route for you there.

    I see what you’re saying John but there’s no provision that links the relative in (a) to (b) in that paragraph? So (a) allows for the partner or relative, and (b) then doesn’t allow for the former partner where they are estranged/divorced/dissolved; but it would still stand to reason that (a) applies for the relative (daughter – who isn’t his daughter now by the sounds of it) – or is it taken that (a) no longer applies to the relative because of the status with the former partner?

    #287622
    John Boxall
    Participant

    I suggest that looking at the Land Registry would establish who the owners of the property are. That in turn will then clarify which bits of Schedule 6 apply

    Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery. The blossom is blighted, the leaf is withered, the god of day goes down upon the dreary scene, and—and in short you are for ever floored.

    Wilkins Micawber, Ch12 David Copperfield

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.