× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Housing costs  →  Thread

How capital is split when one of a married couple is in a care home.

JBotham
forum member

Tandem Team, Fabrick Housing Group, Teesside

Send message

Total Posts: 1

Joined: 15 June 2012

Hi all… I have a query about how Housing Benefits should treat capital when one person of a married couple is in a care home.  Both are pensionable age.  Collective savings are about £25k, some of which is in joint names, some of which is solely in Mr’s name, mostly due to the fact that his wife was unable to sign relevant documents for ISAs etc.

Tax Credit currently assess Mr as having sole access to assets solely in his name and those in joint names, and HB has used this amount as a basis for their decision, putting him above the £16k limit for HB claims.  Would it be fair to argue that any asset in either name should be split jointly 50-50 for benefit purposes, as they are still married and very much a couple even though they are forced to live apart due to Mrs illness?  At the moment they get the worst of both worlds with Mr paying full rent AND high care charges for Mrs due to savings.

P.E.T.E
forum member

Head of Welfare Rights at Barnsley MBC.

Send message

Total Posts: 104

Joined: 17 June 2010

As far as I am aware, joint capital is split 50:50 and capital held by an individual is counted as belonging to that person.

JBotham
forum member

Tandem Team, Fabrick Housing Group, Teesside

Send message

Total Posts: 1

Joined: 15 June 2012

So, on this basis, would it be best to advise Mr to move or convert all assets to a joint account so it is properly representative of how their asset is split?

P.E.T.E
forum member

Head of Welfare Rights at Barnsley MBC.

Send message

Total Posts: 104

Joined: 17 June 2010

Sorry - been out of the office.  The trouble with the action you propose is that we do not know how the dcision maker will view the act - could decide that this action constitutes deprivation of capital and so still treat the person as owning the whole capital.