Hi all,
Client joint owner with ex. They separated and she remained there with kids but in May moved out to rented property due to severely disabled daughter having probs with stairs. Ex who is himself disabled moved back in. She was happy for him to do so as they're still good mates and the kids go to stay with him at weekends.

Client has only just taken steps to realise her share and then only because her IS was stopped back to day after she moved out in May.

She doesn't want him out as the kids still see it as their old home and in any case he's on benefits himself and so couldn't afford to buy her out.

We've got her back on IS now as she's doing all she should - i.e. sought legal advice...taking reasonable steps... but we're appealing the period May to Sept.

Anyone any bright ideas please ?

Hi Sue

Not thought about the May-Sept bit for the moment but if he applies to the court for an occupation order under part 4 of the Family Law Act 1996 and is granted an occupation order then he gets to stay in the house, the house may be unsaleable (due to sitting tenant), thus value of the house may be zero, she gets to stay on IS and everybody wins.

Regards
Paul

Cheers mate, my thoughts exactly (not that I knew the specific bit about occupation order though!!) I'm sure my client's safe for a long time as she's now taking all reasonable steps but it's the past period I'm concerned about.

I can't put my hands on IS regs (someone's hidden the book I hope) but according to CPAG p974 "...the value is ignored if it is occupied by... your former partner from whom you are estranged...if (they're) not a lone parent the value is ignored for 26 wks".

It's not clear to me. Does this mean it's ignored for 26 weeks if they'd been partners immediately prior to her leaving and him moving back in?

Sue

The property can be disregarded indefinitely by virtue of schedule 10, paragraph 4(b) of the IS Gen Regs but read the commentary to the reg for a discussion on the meaning of estranged and reference to the relevant case law.

If the claimant cannot benefit from the protection of paragraph 4 then she may be afforded the protection of paragraph 25 which allows a disregard of 26 weeks from the date she ceased to occupy the home, or for it to be disregarded as long as her former partner is in occupation of the home if her former partner is a lone parent.

The actual wording of that part of paragraph 25 reads “or, where that dwelling is occupied as the home by the former partner who is a lone parent, for as long as it is so occupied”.

I presume from that wording that the disregard ends when the former partner ceases to be a lone parent but I may be wrong on that.

Many thanks Paul. Must find that legislation book!

Sue

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/advisers/docs/lawvols/bluevol/pdf/a6_2501.pdf

Can't believe I never gave that a thought. My head's all over the place trying to prioritize priorities.

Sue