We are looking for caselaw on the requirements of a chair of a tribunal to make a determination on notional and diminishing capital.

In the relevant case the claimant gave away capital at christmas but the decision regarding benefit was not made until January.

The chair only made a decsion that there was capital but made no comment on the level of notional cpaital and regarding deprivation.

Are you sure that the Chairman has not given a decision which states s/he believes the claimant still possessed the ACTUAL CAPITAL (which would mean the issue of notional capital/deprivation did not arise)?

I had a claimant bring in his full statement of written reasons, from a paper hearing. The Chairman had decided that he had both actual and notional capital at the same amount - ie he'd spent the lot to deprive himself, but really he still had it. Some mistake, surely?