Is this DEFINITELY the case? If so, is it actually the intention.
The actual change in circs between the 2 examples is quite minor in real terms (as far as the claimant is concerned), but ends up causing a 26 week discrepancy.
The circular at the time referred to “[b:074bc3861f]any[/b:074bc3861f] change that gives rise to an increased deduction”.
In terms of the claim the change from dep to non-dep gives rise to an increased deduction.
I’m torn between the two options, mainly because not allowing easement hear seems unfair and probably was not the intention. How can then intention be for this to differ from someone turning 25? Or a person who is alreayd a non-dep turning 18?