Client just had o/p decision due to non dep son allegedly living with her. LA applying max NDD. He uses her address for correspondence only and which is not denied as he is NFA and sleeping at various friends and relatives although never even the odd night at client's. He is in process of buying own property but in meantime has no permanent address. I've advised client to get statements from all and sundry but wondering whether anyone knows of any CD's to support the challenge? I really don't want this to proceed to TAS due to length of time it takes so hope to persuade LA to change the decison at recon.

HB has now been reduced to £8+ pw. Her HA are historically dead keen on issuing proceedings and will start to do so as soon as they can.

Thanks
Sue

I think it comes down to the evidence on both sides of the argument. If statements are coming from the son and other people he's been staying with, then it's really over the LA - what is their evidence? By the sound of things, the LA has recently somehow come by some piece of information which leads them to believe the son lives with the claimant. It would be interesting to know what that is - it is something they would presumably need to disclose in any statement of reasons.

Sorry, I don't have any CD's to hand but I am sure they are out there.

She's had half an IUC so I'm going to ask for the statement so we'll see where their reasoning's come from

Wed 05-Oct-05 11:27 AM by ken

Not sure if Commissioner Levenson's decision in CH/4004/2004 may be of use - he considers the issue of 'normally resides' with the claimant.

Very briefly, the claimant's cousin, who had been deported from the USA, and had been without income, had stayed with her between March and May 2003 (on the sofa) and a decision was then made to make a non-dependant deduction with respect to him. The commissioner upholds the claimant's appeal against that decision.

There is a summary of CH/4004/2004 in the briefcase area of rightsnet together with a link to the full decision on the osscsc.gov.uk site.

(Above found by doing a word search in briefcase for non dependant)

Thanks Ken - very helpful.

Try CSIS/100/1993 which says that a tribunal could find that someone was NFA so not a non-dependant at the house he used as a c/o address. Its on rightsnet but I don't know how to put a clever link in.

here you go ..... http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/pdfs/CSIS_100_1993.pdf

You're like me Cordelia - I would know how to do it either! However many thanks for the info and to Shawn for the link. Looks a good un.

Sue