Quick question - JSA / SWA

Kotek Besar

Hi folks, just a quickie..

If JSA is refused (not satisfying HRC), but the applicant has been in receipt of SWA since submission of the JSA claim, does the SWA payment stop? Is the applicant then left with nothing?

Citizens Information: Graham

Hi Kotek Besar



if an applicant does not meet the habitual residence condition for Jobseeker's Allowance then they probably also do not meet the habitual residence condition for Supplementary Welfare Allowance (SWA).

It is unlikely the SWA would continue to be paid in this situation.

The applicant could appeal the decision if they felt there were grounds. More information on this here: http://www.socialwelfareappeals.ie.

Graham Long
Citizens Information

Kotek Besar

Hi Graham,

Thanks for your reply.

The decision to disallow JSA due to not fulfilling the HRC has been asked for review, by way of a letter to the Deciding Officer. I understand that this is the correct procedure, and if the decision is not changed then the next step is an appeal.

In your experience, what is likely to happen to the current SWA payments? Will the Deciding Officer of the JSA claim inform the CWO who dealt with the SWA claim of her decision, and recommend that the SWA payments are stopped?

I note that:

In making a determination on Habitual Residence, Deciding Officers should have regard to any previous HRC determinations issued in respect of the same applicant if other claims for assistance payments or child benefit have already been allowed or refused. The deciding officer should establish whether the same factors continue to apply, and full account must be taken of the latest relevant evidence and information.

Where a Deciding Officer proposes to make a decision on HRC which is different to a previous HRC decision in respect of the same person, both Deciding Officers should consult so as to ensure a consistent interpretation of the applicant's HRC status.

http://www.welfare.ie/EN/OperationalGuidelines/Pages/habres.aspx

Does this mean that, since the CWO who decided the SWA claim agreed that the applicant fulfilled the HRC, then the Deciding Officer of the JSA claim should honour this decision?

Or does it mean that if the Deciding Officer of the JSA claim believes that her decision is correct then she should contact the CWO who decided the SWA claim and recommend that her initial decision is changed, hence SWA payment stopped?

I appreciate your time.

Kotek Besar

Would the Deciding Officer of the JSA claim even know that the applicant is currently in receipt of SWA?

Citizens Information: Graham

Hi Kotek Besar


The Community Welfare Officer and the Deciding Officer for the JA claim should be able to see on their systems if the applicant is receiving a payment and if the applicant has been refused a payment.

The SWA payment should continue pending the outcome of the applicant's appeal.

Graham Long
Citizens Information

Kotek Besar

Today mother-in-law got a letter from a CWO at the HSE Community Care Centre, advising that her SWA payment will be stopped in two weeks time, as a result of her application for JA being refused by the DSFA due not satisfying the HRC.

Funny then, that the same CWO accepted, back in July this year, that mother-in-law was habitually resident when she approved SWA for mother-in-law. But now, in November, the CWO decides that mother-in-law is, in actual fact, not habitually resident after all - on account of the decision by the Deciding Officer dealing with the JA claim.

Maybe I've missed something, but if mother-in-law doesn't satisfy the HRC, she wouldn't have had an application for SWA approved, would she. :rolleyes: How can mother-in-law have been habitually resident in July but not in November?

Anyway, much as part of me wants to fight, on mother-in-law's behalf, this inconsistency, malpractice and non-adherence to guidelines (for the sake of correctness if nothing else), mother-in-law was finally offered a job yesterday - which she gladly accepted and is over the moon about. She started this morning at 7am.

So perhaps, this time anyway, it's better to let them think they've "won".