claimants capital?

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
  • #22482

    Claimant has cashed in ISA and gifted money to his grandson by setting up an open ended ivestment in his grandsons name.
    however it does say on the documents “should the person making the gift decide to sell the shares on behalf of the child….” So i read that as he could actually have access to this capital if he wanted it and therefore the capital shoud still be treated as the claimants as it does say further on when the child is 18 he will need to re register the shares into his name.


    Yes, but if he sells the shares, will the money be the child’s? Is your claimant effectively the manager of the investment until the child reaches 18?


    Waiting for the backlash!

    The cynic in me wonders about deprivation in the case.

    Do I know what I'm doing? The jury's out on that........................


    I think these sort of cases are very difficult to comment on, for the reason that without further information it is impossible to determine the persons intention.
    He has obviously deprived himself of capital by “giving it away”, but were the purposes of that “giving away capital” in order to obtain (more) HB / CTB? 😕
    That we don’t know, and unless you speak to claimant and try to ascertain motives, I think you are on sticky ground deciding that there is deprivation.

    So Mark P could be correct, but he may be off line (and he is cynical!!! 😉 ).

    Like wise, David may be correct, but we don’t know the exact details. His view as seeing the grandparent as the “manager” of money which would otherwise go to the grandchild is very plausible, but then so could Davo’s view of the situation.

    I would be looking for more information before I made a decision on this case, at least a suspicion that the claimant had knowledge that he used about capital cut off points, or effect of capital on HB / CTB and realised the effect in his case.
    Or you would have to be sure that any money would legally go to the grandparent if the investment was wound up for any reason – possibly held in trust until grandson is 18.

    Either way, I think you need to speak to the claimant further, aand even then it will be difficult for you to find definate evidence – you may have to go on your own feelings about it, and be prepared to argue them on appeal. 8)

    Kevin D

    Based on the info given, there appear to be three options:

    1) the clmt has ACTUAL capital

    2) the clmt has notional cap

    3) neither of the above

    For [b:7876e4cdde]actual cap[/b:7876e4cdde], these may be of interest:

    [b:7876e4cdde]R(IS) 01/90 – CIS/0057/1989[/b:7876e4cdde] – it is a case which looked at whether a claimant has truly relinquished control or ownership of the capital.

    However, [b:7876e4cdde]CH/0404/2005[/b:7876e4cdde] balances it somewhat. From memory, this CD raised a few eyebrows…..

    An earlier thread contained a whole list of CDs for [b:7876e4cdde]notional cap[/b:7876e4cdde]…

    In particular, [b:7876e4cdde]CH/1873/2005[/b:7876e4cdde] may be of help.


Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.