I have a tnt in IB claiming HB.. Claim suspended because:

He has had a non dep 'living' with him who worked and earnt approx 200 pw..

However ND apprently only stayed on average 2 nights a week.. Rest of time at friends or working away..

ND moved out officially on 22 March. Cli. has no idea where he is living now, as he hardly saw him when he 'lived' there..

HB have written asking for date ND started working (no idea)
Proof of ND's earnings (cli has found 3 random wage slips)
He is also informing them that ND has now moved out.. but I envisage problems as no forwarding address

I have a couple of weeks before the deadline date for info needed, and I am trying to pre-empt any issues HB may raise about this.. If anyone has anything to advise me..

Hoping so.. x

To be a non-dependent the person must be 'normally resident'. Take a look at CIS/14850/1996 which says that 'normal residence' suggests a degree of permanence. Also, see CH/4004/2004 which helps to define the meaning of 'normally resides'. In this case a person who lived with the claimant for over 2 months was found not to be 'normally residing' with the claimant (and hence not a non-dependant) even though they had nowhere else to live.

Much appreciated Ruth, I will have a read through those items.. x

Fri 28-Mar-08 02:51 PM by Anselmo

You could also look at CH/48/2006.

It considers the application of non-dep deductions when full information regarding the non-dep's income is not available (in that case the non-dep refused to supply it).

The thrust of it is that the council must base the deduction on the info that the claimant has been able to supply. In the case in question they had been told that the non-dep was young (19 I think) and was working part-time in a shop, but they slapped the highest deduction on because she did not provide payslips. The Commisioner said that ws wrong, their decision must be grounded in reality, and a part-time school-leaving shop-worker could not possibly be earning that much.

So they should accept the 3 random wage slips as proof.