Does any one have a copy of commissioners decision CIS/231/1991. The decision relates to an Income Support claimant who had been treated as having intentionally deprived himself of capital when he transferred the ownership of his property to his parents who were aged over 60. The commissioner reversed the tribunal decision concluding that the property should have been disregarded as capital as it was occupied by a relative over 60 as per para 4 of Scedule 10 to the IS regs. I need the decision to strenghen my arguments with a local authority that a home that was transferred in similar circumstances should not now be taken into account as notional capital. I have a client who has dementia, his wife still lives in their family home. Some time ago they transferred ownership to their family. Now the man is in a care home the Local Authority are treating this as intentional deprivation and in possession of notional capital equal to half the value of the home (which is another mistake and a different argument altogether). However, I wish to argue that the house should simply be disregaded because the partner continues to occupy the premises, but I need the above decision to help achieve this.

Give me an email address or a fax number and I will send it to you

I don't know if things are different in Scotland, if they are the same - National Assistance (Assessment of Resources) Regulations 1992 reg 25 (1) "A resident may be treated as possessing actual capital of which he has deprived himself for the purpose of decreasing the amount that he may be liable to pay for his accommodation..."

If his spouse is residing in the property it would be disregarded under Schedule 4 paragraph 2 (same regs) if he still possessed the property. If the transfer of the property had not taken place then his charge would not be higher and there can be no deprivation.

The fax number is 0141 248 5447.

Thanks this is much appreciated.