contrivance appeal:previously owned home gifted to son but returns after 5 years period

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #38225
    yiuyiu
    Participant

    Hi all I need some inspiration and Comm Decisions for this appeal:

    72 year old claimant and wife both on DLA; jointly bought their 4 bed property with their son under RTB in 2002 for £25,000 (after a £50,000 discount). In 2003 they gifted their share of the prop to the son and moved in with him as he was the one paying the mortgage anyway. Clmt provided a transfer document dated 2003 but land reg shows clmt remained owner until Oct 2005 when it was sold solely to daughter in law.

    In 2005 they went to live with their daughter; now 5 years later in July 2010 clmt and wife move out of the daughter’s hse (lack of space) and back into their 4 bed hse, being charged £1,500 per month rent by their daughter in law, and in order to ‘justify’ the rent they have had several non-dependants moving in and out of the property in order to occupy the other 3 bedrooms (they are mostly foreign students and never stay more than a few months and are supposedly nephews of the claimant). We did pay initially but now found out he previously owned albeit over 5 years ago now) so have ended ent from July 2010 under contrivance.

    Claimant has appealed against both contrivance and OP decisions so am looking for some help with submission eg Comm Dec to quote etc; and as well as 9(1)(l) should I also consider alternative options eg non commercial/deprivation/previously owned even though it has been over 5 years given that he was in property at the time of sale? I do think they are blatently taking advantage of the HB scheme and hope tribunal will agree but given their age and health I’d just like to cover all grounds and build a sound response

    Any suggestion or comments would be appreciated thanks

    #107695
    yiuyiu
    Participant

    Just come across CH/3698/2008 (and Judge Jacobs confirming his earlier decision of CH/3616/2003); does this mean my clmt could be excluded from claiming HB on his former property full stop (and we don’t have to proof contrivance) as the 5 years exemption only applies if he had remained in occupation at the time of reliquishment? or am i getting it wrong?

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