Fair comment - I thought that a simplistic 50% split assisted in this case and I would also worry that the onus would probably lie on the mother (trustee) to show whose money was used for what purpose, which may well be beyond most.
As a separate issue Ariadne, and with your greater knowledge in such areas, could you give me any pointers in a slightly different case I have here.
A mother, with a severely disabled adult daughter opened a bank account in joint names with her daughter into which have been paid - 1 - direct payments from the local authority for the daughter's care package (i.e. fully disregarded as daughter's income and capital); and 2 - payments from the local PCT, initially paid in one sum per annum but now on a monthly basis via Social Services at the same time as the direct payments. The payments from the PCT total about £39,000 per year
The payments from the PCT have not been identified as being paid under any particular legislation. Although the daughter was previously resident in a care home, paid for by the PCT, the payments to this account are not Continuing Health Care payments. However, it is likely that they are payments to the mother (and father) for the care of the daughter, rather than payments to the daughter for her own care (i.e. unlike the actual direct payments from Social Services).
If it is the case that the payments from the PCT are actually to the parents, and is "their" money, so to speak, how should the daughter's interest in the account (i.e. the direct payments) be viewed? Income support was stopped for the daughter because there was over £16,000 in the account, indeed over £32,000.
Thanks
Brian
|