capital that has been seized

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
  • #40020

    if you have a claimant who has had their capital seized by the police, does this need to be removed from the claim?

    the DWP have advised us that this claimant has had their income support entitlement removed from 2004, the reason being capital in excess of £16k.

    they have had £43k in cash removed from their home and seized by the police.

    the remaining capital is less than £16k.

    they were on income support up to 2007, and then onto guaranteed credit to present,

    so, i suppose my question is do we add the capital from 2004 up to 2007 as being the £43k, and then remove the capital as the guaranteed is still in payment for certain periods

    Chris Robbins

    You have a number of decisions to make here. I suspect you may not have all the information you need to do so.
    From 2004 to 2007 your claimant on IS. DWP have now revised/superseded and removed that award of IS on the grounds of excess capital. If you are satisfied that such capital was held you can follow suit.
    From 2007 claimant on PGC. You don’t say whether Pension Service have made a revised decision that capital has to be taken into account and whether that removes entitlement to PGC. If they have then again you can follow suit if they still had the capital.
    That brings you up to the current situation. If PGC is still in payment AND you are satisfied Pension Service actually know about this capital there is nothing for you to do. Claimant remains passported to HB/CTB. If they don’t know about it (and that would not surprise me given the way communications between different sections of DWP are handled) you need to give them the info and check if it affects the PGC award.
    If it does then on what basis is a current award assessed? They now actually hold less than £16K. It is normal where capital is seized or assets frozen for some sort of court order to be made allowing the person concerned so much a week for living expenses. You should check if that is the case here. However as far as capital is concerned you would not include capital that has been seized in this way.

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.