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)
.
