<p>The student is always welcome to try (even to try for the dependency override). However, the intent of the law is supposed to be upheld in all professional judgment decisions. A dependency override in this case “could” happen - but it really does not fit with the guidelines for PJ. This is from finaid.org:</p>
<p>Financial aid administrators are not allowed to use professional judgment to circumvent the intent of the law or regulations or to change the formula or tables used in the Federal need analysis methodology or to change the EFC directly. Only the inputs to the formula may be changed, and then only to the extent dictated by the special circumstances. Adjustments are not permitted to correct a real or perceived problem in the tables or methodology, such as a lack of regional adjustments in the Income Protection Allowance, a lack of fairness in the state tax allowances (e.g., a failure of the state tax allowances to consider differences in local income taxes), or an error in the asset protection allowance tables.</p>
<p>Moreover, when a specific situtation is not addressed by the letter of the law or the regulations, financial aid administrators should avoiding rendering professional judgment decisions that are inconsistent with the spirit of existing law, regulations and guidance.</p>