Cl. father (77) lived alone. His income is SRP & occupational pension. Exempt CT as severely mentally impaired. Cl. (divorced, works PT, low income) moved in to care for him. CT bill then sent(to father, who is sole owner of house) with 25% sole adult discount. Council suggest to Cl. CTB claim be submitted.

It looks as if the claim has to be by the father as the person liable for the CT, with Cl. as a non-dependent, & with father's income taken into account as well as Cl's. This will likely mean no CTB which seems inequitable as his income was ignored (or irrelevant) when he lived alone. I've been unable to find anything which says his income can be ignored in the CTB claim, or that the claim can be made just by the daughter on her own account. (I know that, if she could claim herself, there would be no NDD for the father.)

Have I got it right please, or is there any way his income could be ignored?

The daughter cannot be held liable for CTAX (CTAX hierachy rules). Therefore, any claim would be unsuccessgful as nil liability equals nil CTB.

Any CTB claim must therefore be made by the father. The daughter will be a non-dependant - no way around that. Therefore, the father will either get "main" CTB based on his income / capital etc; or "second adult rebate" based on the income of the non-dep (whichever is higher).

Assuming the father gets Attendance Allowance, there would be no non-dep deduction.

As to the issue of CTAX discounts (not my area of expertise), the father may well be "invisible" (due to SMI). In turn, there would only be one "visible" occupier (daughter) and a single persons discount would apply - father still remains liable. If the CTAX info needs a bit of refining, I'm sure someone will correct it or add to it.

Hope the above helps.

Regards