Hi Steve,
Thanks for your response.
I would suggest to the client that since she has no resources for which to provide for the child's need, it would be reasonable for the friend to agree to accept responsibilty for a time (which she is already doing anyway as she is providing a roof and food). For CB it is not necessary for the child to be in the friend's 'household' (legal def) as the child physically lives with the friend and (although this need only be an 'or') she is contributing to the cost of the child.
CTC is a little less straightforward, but again, the legislation does not refer to the term 'household' (though this could be implied). The CPAG handbook (page 1198 (08-09)) also says that a child can be "count as 'normally living with you' even if s/he also lives with someone else". In competing claim cases both potential claimants should decide which of them normally has the most responsibility.
It may not be so straightforward if the friend is receiving HB/CTB (which i don't yet know), but if the friend gets CB this will not be a difficult issues.
I'm aware how this might look to the benefit authorities, and frankly, they'd be right. However, the alternative is that the government allows the child to live in an income-less household and I cannot see that we propose falls foul of any rules or could realistically be seen as any kind of deception.
The main downsides that I can see is that the friend will have disruption to her own claims, in respect of which we can offer support, and payment may still not come through before the client gains hab res and a NINO so might all be a waste of time anyway.
Also, the client and child have recently arrived from Germany and another of my clients arrived from an EU country over a year ago and the CBU have still not decided the entitlement as they are finding out if the coutry of origin has responsbility to pay CB.
Tony
|