Joint account to sole account

diabeticguy

My mate had a sole current account and added my name to it because I was an undischarged bankrupt and because my spending was out of control because of my mental health and depresssion. My beenfits were paid into the account and my mate gave me my money as I needed it. Plan worked perfectly. Eventually, I got my own sole account and my benefits were paid directly to my a/c. and the few ££ I had left in the joint was withdrawn. Everything worked fine. However, a mate of ours stated after some time that money in the joint account (which was still open) could seen to be part of mine and that may affect the capital limits affecting my IS.

My name was taken off the joint account and is now in the sole name of my mate. Would it be pressumed that all money left in the newly sole account is now that of my mate ?

JuicyJesus

diabeticguy wrote: »

My name was taken off the joint account and is now in the sole name of my mate. Would it be pressumed that all money left in the newly sole account is now that of my mate ?

Yes. Money in an account is legally the property of the account holder.

diabeticguy

JuicyJesus wrote: »

Yes. Money in an account is legally the property of the account holder.

I am much obliged. I am aware that perhaps the answer was a simple one, but where benefits are involved one needs to be on the ball. My gratitude again.

rogerblack

It's not that simple.
What is and is not capital, for a benefits point of view is not a simple topic.
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/dmgch52.pdf is the rules guide for decision makers at the DWP.

In short.
Capital is everything that you legally own, and can sell, or apply to the courts for the rights to sell.
Ignored are some exclusions, like your main home, and personal possessions.
However, in this case, you did not have ownership of the money in the account that was not yours, unless this was part of the agreement between you.
Having the money not in a seperate account is a problem, but it is a complication in that you may have to show that - for example - you diddn't access the capital during the time of your access to it.
The money in the account after you had no access to it does not affect your claim in any way.
(but again, you may in some cases need to show this)

diabeticguy

rogerblack wrote: »

It's not that simple.
What is and is not capital, for a benefits point of view is not a simple topic.
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/dmgch52.pdf is the rules guide for decision makers at the DWP.

In short.
Capital is everything that you legally own, and can sell, or apply to the courts for the rights to sell.
Ignored are some exclusions, like your main home, and personal possessions.
However, in this case, you did not have ownership of the money in the account that was not yours, unless this was part of the agreement between you.
Having the money not in a seperate account is a problem, but it is a complication in that you may have to show that - for example - you diddn't access the capital during the time of your access to it.
The money in the account after you had no access to it does not affect your claim in any way.
(but again, you may in some cases need to show this)

Oh god, this is so complicated. I opened a sole account in my own name some time ago, and realising 3 years ago this could be a problem my name was taken off the joint. So in conclusion, I have a sole a/c in my name and my name was taken off a joint account three years ago. Does that sound like I should be OK

rogerblack

diabeticguy wrote: »

Oh god, this is so complicated. I opened a sole account in my own name some time ago, and realising 3 years ago this could be a problem my name was taken off the joint. So in conclusion, I have a sole a/c in my name and my name was taken off a joint account three years ago. Does that sound like I should be OK

If it's you with the problem - and you have no access to the money now - you certainly have no access to the capital now, so there is almost no question of it being yours.
If it wasn't yours to begin with - then it isn't counted.

The only time you'd have to prove that it's not yours - which for example would be done by showing the amount paid out to you matched the amount paid into the account - would be in the case of an enquiry into your benefit during that period.
This is unlikely barring specific allegations.