One Parent Family Allowence-Staying overnight??

paddy147

Whats is the rules with regards a lady who is "One parent Allownece" and them staying overnight in another persons house?


Trying to get some clarification on this matter and help out a workmate who is in a relationship with a single mother.He is not the childs father,just in a relationship with the lady.

If the lady stayed overnight for even 1 night in the week,then would she lose her one parent allowence?

Thanks.

keredern

In order to be entitled to a OPF payment, the claimant must not reside on a FULL TIME basis with a partner. In other words, not be cohabitating.

Anyone claiming a DSP payment is entitled to have overnight visitors regardless of whom they are.

In my experience, 3-4 nights is perfectly acceptable!

Being on a OPF payment does not affect a claimant's basic human rights, i.e. having overnight visitors!

A claimant IS entitled to a OPF whether or not s/he is in a relationship with ANYONE including the father of the child(ren)!

DSP OPF section DO NOT dictate who can & cannot stay overnight in a claimant's home. As long as s/he is not residing with a partner on a full time basis, s/he is entitled to receive OPF (assuming all other criteria is in place!).

In a democratic society people are allowed to make their own choices around their living arrangements.

Being in receipt of DSP should not & does not compromise anyone's right to choose how they live as long as they comply with the relevant criteria.

All of the above applies to anyone making an honest & truthful application.

Hope that helps?:)

MariMel

I may be wrong but up to 3 nights is ok....4 and then that place becomes where you spend most of your time.
I know 3 yrs ago it was the case with my ex who stayed with me for few nights a week. Any more than 3 nights and he would have been considered living with me.

paddy147

Right then,so the lady in question would still be perfectly well entitled to keep her One OParent Allowence then???

Can I ask where this is in writing??

I have trawled the internet (welfare.ie and also citizins information) and cannot find ANYTHING that says anything about staying overnight for even 1 night.

There seems to be a different story comming from the SW inspectors though,as Im reading lots of threads where the inspector had canceled OPF allowence,when the person stayed over for even 1 night.


Does anyone have it in writing about being allowed to stay overnight in someone elses house then????

Thanks.

paddy147

MariMel wrote: »

I may be wrong but up to 3 nights is ok....4 and then that place becomes where you spend most of your time.
I know 3 yrs ago it was the case with my ex who stayed with me for few nights a week. Any more than 3 nights and he would have been considered living with me.

Where or who did you find this out from?

Is there any written document or website that states this?


Thanks.:)

paddy147

keredern wrote: »

In order to be entitled to a OPF payment, the claimant must not reside on a FULL TIME basis with a partner. In other words, not be cohabitating.

Anyone claiming a DSP payment is entitled to have overnight visitors regardless of whom they are.

In my experience, 3-4 nights is perfectly acceptable!

Being on a OPF payment does not affect a claimant's basic human rights, i.e. having overnight visitors!

A claimant IS entitled to a OPF whether or not s/he is in a relationship with ANYONE including the father of the child(ren)!

DSP OPF section DO NOT dictate who can & cannot stay overnight in a claimant's home. As long as s/he is not residing with a partner on a full time basis, s/he is entitled to receive OPF (assuming all other criteria is in place!).

In a democratic society people are allowed to make their own choices around their living arrangements.

Being in receipt of DSP should not & does not compromise anyone's right to choose how they live as long as they comply with the relevant criteria.

All of the above applies to anyone making an honest & truthful application.

Hope that helps?:)

Any links to where you got that info from??

Reason for me asking,is that my workmates girlfriend got called for an interview with a SW inspector yesterday,and this inspector (a lady inspector) stated that she wasnt entitled to OPF allowence,if she even stayed overnight for 1 night.That this constituted living/cohabiting with the boyfriend.



How can that be then???

Maybe the inspector is very wrong on this matter??(judging by what you have posted).

Thanks.:)

keredern

paddy147 wrote: »

Any links to where you got that info from??

Reason for me asking,is that my workmates girlfriend got called for an interview with a SW inspector yesterday,and this inspector (a lady) stated that she wasnt entitled to OPF allowence,if she even stayed overnight for 1 night.

Now either this inspector is very wrong on this matter,or else very pre-judgemental (judging by what you have posted).

Thanks.:)

Your friend's girlfriend should request in writing the legislation which prevents her from having overnight visitors.

Residing together as a couple bars a claimant from OPF, not having a relationship with another person.

I cannot account for the comments allegedly made by the SWI in this case, but would request this information in writing!

If your friend's girlfriend has her OPF withdrawn on the basis of having an overnight visitor on one night, she should lodge an appeal.

I'm not sure how much more helpful I can be in this regard as each case under investigation is assessed individually.

Where two people are genuinely NOT cohabitating, there will be ample evidence to support this.

The other party will have proof of address (e.g. ESB bill), bank accounts, car registration, revenue registration, rent/mortgage, bin charges, mobile phone bills, payslips, etc. to establish their residence at their own accommodation.

My own opinion on this is that if two households are being maintained & the other party only stays over on average 2-3 days in any week then this is not a cohab situation.:)

But doctors differ & patients die!!!:rolleyes:

If you friends are not cohabitating then they have nothing to fear from a review of the Mum's entitlement.

Sorry I can't give you a more conclusive answer but I do hope this helps!

MariMel

paddy147 wrote: »

Any links to where you got that info from??

Reason for me asking,is that my workmates girlfriend got called for an interview with a SW inspector yesterday,and this inspector (a lady) stated that she wasnt entitled to OPF allowence,if she even stayed overnight for 1 night.

Now either this inspector is very wrong on this matter,or else very pre-judgemental (judging by what you have posted).

Thanks.:)

I dont have any written documents to back up what i said.
An inspector came out to my house and asked me about my living arrangements. I told them he stayed 2 or 3 nights every week. My OPF never changed. Ive always been upfront and open when it comes to dealing with the SW. My ex worked nights at the latter end of the week in his home town hours away from where I lived so there is no way he could have lived with me the majority of the week anyway.

The SW really seem to be getting very strict recently.
I went in recently to ask about returning to a OPF payment and was told I would only get it if my child stayed with me 7 nights a week. (long story as to why i was on opf, then off) I told them that that was impossible for any parent to do. Told them that that meant my child would never be allowed stay over at a friends or in his grandparents. And that it meant every lone parent who let their children stay even one night in the other parents house, that they would lose the opf. Poor woman didnt know what to say. Asked her to show me the legal requirements forbidding me from allowing my child stay overnight in his grandparents house. She took my number and said she would call me.....still waiting on that though.
The same could be said in your friends girlfriends case.....where does it specifically say that you are forbidden to spend one night away ever?

paddy147

MariMel wrote: »

I dont have any written documents to back up what i said.
An inspector came out to my house and asked me about my living arrangements. I told them he stayed 2 or 3 nights every week. My OPF never changed. Ive always been upfront and open when it comes to dealing with the SW. My ex worked nights at the latter end of the week in his home town hours away from where I lived so there is no way he could have lived with me the majority of the week anyway.

The SW really seem to be getting very strict recently.
I went in recently to ask about returning to a OPF payment and was told I would only get it if my child stayed with me 7 nights a week. (long story as to why i was on opf, then off) I told them that that was impossible for any parent to do. Told them that that meant my child would never be allowed stay over at a friends or in his grandparents. And that it meant every lone parent who let their children stay even one night in the other parents house, that they would lose the opf. Poor woman didnt know what to say. Asked her to show me the legal requirements forbidding me from allowing my child stay overnight in his grandparents house. She took my number and said she would call me.....still waiting on that though.
The same could be said in your friends girlfriends case.....where does it specifically say that you are forbidden to spend one night away ever?

Thats a very very good point indeed.

So maybe my workmates girlfriend should ask to be shown the "legal requirements" then?

d9oiu2wk07blr5

paddy147 wrote: »

Whats is the rules with regards a lady who is "One parent Allownece" and them staying overnight in another persons house?


Trying to get some clarification on this matter and help out a workmate who is in a relationship with a single mother.He is not the childs father,just in a relationship with the lady.

If the lady stayed overnight for even 1 night in the week,then would she lose her one parent allowence?

Thanks.

Here's the DSP's operational guidelines for what constitutes cohabitation.

http://www.welfare.ie/EN/OperationalGuidelines/pages/cohabit.aspx

keredern

Excellent link!

That should help clarify any confusion for people.

Every case is examined individually & assessed accordingly.

It is very difficult to give generalised definitive advice on this topic in particular, unlike the question of excess means for example!

d9oiu2wk07blr5

keredern wrote: »

Excellent link!

That should clarify any confusion for people.

Printer to hand...the operational guidelines criteria which they use to assess cohabitation is then used as the basis of lodging the appeal...:D.

paddy147

If there is no actual written/legal documents and proof to state that staying overnight for 1 night or even a few nights a week is classed as "cohabiting" then how come the SW Inspector can state this to the girlfriend,and then say that her OPF allowence will be stopped because she has stayed overnight for 1 night in the week???


How does the inspector have the right to state this and threaten the girlfriend like this with blatantly false information,even when that link above clearly states that "living together" doesnt even mean or prove that a couple are "cohabiting".

d9oiu2wk07blr5

paddy147 wrote: »

If there is no actual written/legal documents and proof to state that staying overnight for 1 night is classed as "cohabiting" then how come the SW Inspector can state this to the girlfriend,and then say that her OPF allowence will be stopped because she has stayed overnight for 1 night???


How does the inspector have the right to state this and threaten the girlfriend like this with blatantly false information,even when that link above clearly states that "living together" doesnt even mean or prove that a couple are "cohabiting".

They are relying heavily on the assumption that the claimant doesn't know much much about social welfare law, which would affect their ability to challenge these decisions on appeal.

Your workmate should also submit a section 7 FOI request seeking access to all files.

micropig

Surely if the two parents of the child are contributing to the childs' up keep, then the lone parent is not alone, regardless of the living arrangements?

Atlantis50

Malcolm Delicious Tunnel wrote: »

Here's the DSP's operational guidelines for what constitutes cohabitation.

http://www.welfare.ie/EN/OperationalGuidelines/pages/cohabit.aspx

"Living together" is not defined, so that is a subjective call on the part of the SW Inspector.

keredern

Malcolm Delicious Tunnel wrote: »

They are relying heavily on the assumption that the claimant doesn't know much much about social welfare law, which would affect their ability to challenge these decisions on appeal.

A claimant does not need to know anything about the relevant legislation to successfully appeal a refusal.

It is the Appeals Officer's job to review the case & apply the legislation accordingly.

This may result in the appeal being won or the decision of the Deciding Officer being upheld.

Very few appellants would have any real knowledge of specific legislation but this would have no bearing on the result of their appeal!

Paddy147, it is always very difficult to correctly interpret anecdotal information relating to a case. It's always possible there is more to your friend's case then the details that have been given to you.

In any case, if the lady in question is refused then she should lodge an appeal within 21 days.

Hope it all works out!:)

yabadabado

Malcolm Delicious Tunnel wrote: »

They are relying heavily on the assumption that the claimant doesn't know much much about social welfare law, which would affect their ability to challenge these decisions on appeal.

That is complete and utter crap.You don't have a clue what you are talking about.

d9oiu2wk07blr5

Atlantis50 wrote: »

"Living together" is not defined, so that is a subjective call on the part of the SW Inspector.

It is defined...."a cohabitant is one of 2 adults (whether of the same or the opposite sex) who live together as a couple in an intimate and committed relationship and who are not related to each other within the prohibited degrees of relationship or married to each other or civil partners of each other".

Also, where a claim is disallowed the onus is then on the Department to satisfy the deciding officer that cohabitation exists in accordance with the criteria.

d9oiu2wk07blr5

yabadabado wrote: »

That is complete and utter crap.You don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Really...that's what the last person said as well...:D.

paddy147

micropig wrote: »

Surely if the two parents of the child are contributing to the childs' up keep, then the lone parent is not alone, regardless of the living arrangements?

What has that got to do with my opening post?

Did you read what I posted in my opening post??


The lady in question,is a single mother,who has a boyfriend (my workmate).

He IS NOT the childs father.I stated that clearly.

They are only boyfriend and girlfriend and DO NOT live together.


He also doesnt contribute to the childs upbringing either

The lady stayed overnight for 1 night with the boyfriend.

Now she has a SW inspector on her case accusing her of cohabiting and making threats to her and using miss/false information aswell.


Please read what I have posted again.


Thankyou.

yabadabado

someone is telling lies here,there is no way that a person who stayed overnight once in another person's home would have a SW inspector call to them accusing them of being co-hab.there has to be more to this story.

cee_jay

Malcolm Delicious Tunnel wrote: »

Also, where a claim is disallowed the onus is then on the Department to satisfy the deciding officer that cohabitation exists in accordance with the criteria.

No, the onus is on the applicant, either at the time of making a claim or when under review, to satisfy the SW inspector or Deciding Officer that they satisfy the conditions to receive the payment they have applied for.

Where a claim is disallowed, and appealed, again the onus is on the applicant to demonstrate how they satisfy the conditions of the scheme.

The onus is never on the Department to satisfy a deciding officer. A deciding officer for One Parent Family receives a detailed report from a SW Inspector on a One Parent Family Payment applicant and makes the decision from that accordingly.

OP, the opening line from www.welfare.ie on One Parent Family Payment is:

One-Parent Family Payment (OFP) is a payment for men and women who are bringing children up without the support of a partner.

There are a lot of guidelines and conditions to be met in relation to this scheme. The guidelines for cohabitation have been posted earlier on this thread. It does not say in any guidelines that you can have someone stay overnight for x nights of the week (or not as the case may be). Your friend not being the father of the child has nothing to do with the decision.
A social welfare inspector meets with the applicant to determine the facts in their case, and even if people are stating they live in separate addresses, a claim could be disallowed based on information gleaned by the Social Welfare Inspector during the course of the investigation. This is based on interviewing the claimant, observations on the claimants address, and in some cases local knowledge. Even if they state they are not living in the same address, but are supporting one another, and the address situation is contrived to receive social welfare payments, a payment can be disallowed (I am not saying this is the case here, but just pointing out that it is possible).
As I have stated, the onus of proof is on the applicant.

Your friend's girlfriend can appeal any decision made by the Department.

paddy147

yabadabado wrote: »

someone is telling lies here,there is no way that a person who stayed overnight once in another person's home would have a SW inspector call to them accusing them of being co-hab.there has to be more to this story.

Eh someone is not telling lies here.Not from my workmates or his girlfriends side anyway.I know that for a fact.

The SW inspector (middle aged lady) said to my workmates girlfriend in the SW office,that even staying overnight for 1 night would mean non entitlement to the OFP allowence.She also grilled her on why she hasnt got a job and what she was doing to get a job.


My mates girlfriend is spending alot of time applying for alot of jobs (she has lots of email proof) and is also doing various FAS courses on her own time,so she not sitting back on her ar5e doing nothing.

My workmates girlfriend also mentioned to him and me,that the SW inspector called her in for the interview/interigation at 2.30pm.

Now what time do you think schools finish up and mothers have to collect their kids???

2:30pm.

But anything to make the SW Inspector happy,even if it means the mother not being able to collect her child from school

Fittle

keredern wrote: »

Being on a OPF payment does not affect a claimant's basic human rights, i.e. having overnight visitors!

I love the way you use bold text, and exclamation marks to back up your information. Since when is one of a persons 'basic human rights' having overnight visitors I've trawled the IHRC website, and funnily enough, can't find a reference to it anywhere:rolleyes:

Fittle

paddy147 wrote: »

Eh someone is not telling lies here.Not from my workmates or his girlfriends side anyway.I know that for a fact.

The SW inspector (middle aged lady) said to my workmates girlfriend in the SW office,that even staying overnight for 1 night would mean non entitlement to the OFP allowence.She also grilled her on why she hasnt got a job and what she was doing to get a job.


My mates girlfriend is spending alot of time applying for alot of jobs (she has lots of email proof) and is also doing various FAS courses on her own time,so she not sitting back on her ar5e doing nothing.

Eh someone IS telling lies.

She's doing 'various' FAS courses'...didn't think it was that easy to get a FAS course these days, never mind 'various' FAS course:rolleyes:

paddy147

Fittle wrote: »

Eh someone IS telling lies.

She's doing 'various' FAS courses'...didn't think it was that easy to get a FAS course these days, never mind 'various' FAS course:rolleyes:

Shes perfectly entitled to do the course and courses.And that was even noted by her to the SW Inspector.That was the only thing the SW inspector had anything good to say to her about.

yabadabado

@Paddy147
Can you answer a few questions?

The SW inspector (middle aged lady) said to my workmates girlfriend in the SW office,that even staying overnight for 1 night would mean non entitlement to the OFP allowence.She also grilled her on why she hasnt got a job and what she was doing to get a job.
She stayed overnight once and was called in for an interview because of this or had she already called been called for an interview?
Did the SW inspector know this or did the applicant tell her?
A person on OFP is under no obligation to seek work while claiming this payment,so it makes no difference to her claim.


My mates girlfriend is spending alot of time applying for alot of jobs (she has lots of email proof) and is also doing various FAS courses on her own time,so she not sitting back on her ar5e doing nothing.
Again it doesn't matter what the claimant is doing regarding work or FAS courses she doesn't need to do either to claim OFP.

My workmates girlfriend also mentioned to him and me,that the SW inspector called her in for the interview/interigation at 2.30pm.
Now what time do you think schools finish up and mothers have to collect their kids???
2:30pm.
But anything to make the SW Inspector happy,even if it means the mother not being able to collect her child from school
The letter that comes calling the person in states if the appointment is not at a good time to contact the office so it can be rearranged.

paddy147

yabadabado wrote: »

@Paddy147
Can you answer a few questions?

The SW inspector (middle aged lady) said to my workmates girlfriend in the SW office,that even staying overnight for 1 night would mean non entitlement to the OFP allowence.She also grilled her on why she hasnt got a job and what she was doing to get a job.
She stayed overnight once and was called in for an interview because of this or had she already called been called for an interview?
Did the SW inspector know this or did the applicant tell her?
A person on OFP is under no obligation to seek work while claiming this payment,so it makes no difference to her claim.


My mates girlfriend is spending alot of time applying for alot of jobs (she has lots of email proof) and is also doing various FAS courses on her own time,so she not sitting back on her ar5e doing nothing.
Again it doesn't matter what the claimant is doing regarding work or FAS courses she doesn't need to do either to claim OFP.

My workmates girlfriend also mentioned to him and me,that the SW inspector called her in for the interview/interigation at 2.30pm.
Now what time do you think schools finish up and mothers have to collect their kids???
2:30pm.
But anything to make the SW Inspector happy,even if it means the mother not being able to collect her child from school
The letter that comes calling the person in states if the appointment is not at a good time to contact the office so it can be rearranged.

Inspector called to the girlfriends family house at 10am on the morning in question.Inspector left a letter with the girlfriends parents,as girlfriend wasnt at home (out on a walk after morning school run).

The inspector left in a letter stating the time she called,and she also SUMMONSED the girlfriend up to the SW office for 2:30pm that very same day.
The letter also stated that if she failed to show up at 2:30pm that same day,then OPF allowence would be cut off.

The Inspector said in the meeting,that it had been noted,that the girlfriend was seen going to another addess/house (the boyfriends house) in the late morning/early daytime (before the school pickup run).

It was also said to her about her co-owning the house with the boyfriend and if she had a mortgage on the house.She stated NO,as she had recently come out of/finished up college and couldnt get any work,so how could she get a mortgage and co own any house??

She was then grilled about her relationship with her boyfriend and whether it was a seruious relationship and if there was a future for her and the boyfriend.

Then she was grilled about her looking for a job and what she was doing with her spare time.

Then she was asked to produce (ASAP) up to date bank statements that prove she lives/resides at her family house and also written proof that she doesnt own any part of the boyfriends house,or have a mortgage with him.





Is this right for a SW officer to grill a person like this and pre judge and more or less threaten someone like this??????

yabadabado

paddy147 wrote: »

Inspector called to the girlfriends family house at 10am on the morning in question.Inspector left a letter with the girlfriends parents,as girlfriend wasnt at home (out on a walk after morning school run).

The inspector left in a letter stating the time she called,and she also SUMMONSED the girlfriend up to the SW office for 2:30pm that very same day.
The letter also stated that if she failed to show up,then OPF allowence would be cut off.

The Inspector said in the meeting,that it had been noted,that the girlfriend was seen going to another addess/house (the boyfriends house) in the daytime (before the school pickup run).

Was this person in receipt of OFP or had they a claim waiting to be awarded?
Was it an unnotified visit from the inspector ?

paddy147

yabadabado wrote: »

Was this person in receipt of OFP or had they a claim waiting to be awarded?
Was it an unnotified visit from the inspector ?

She has been recieving OFP allowence for a fair while now.She allways been upfront and fully honest and legit with them.

Visit was on the spot house call and was unnotified.

keredern

Fittle wrote: »

I love the way you use bold text, and exclamation marks to back up your information. Since when is one of a persons 'basic human rights' having overnight visitors I've trawled the IHRC website, and funnily enough, can't find a reference to it anywhere:rolleyes:

Not exactly sure what your point is? Are you suggesting that a recipient of OPF is not allowed to have someone stay overnight? Freedom of choice is a basic human right!:rolleyes:

Perhaps you should spend less time being pedantic & more time offering genuine advice & assistance.:p

Let's keep the thread on topic!

micropig

keredern wrote: »

Not exactly sure what your point is? Are you suggesting that a recipient of OPF is not allowed to have someone stay overnight? Freedom of choice is a basic human right!:rolleyes:

Perhaps you should spend less time being pedantic & more time offering genuine advice & assistance.:p

Let's keep the thread on topic!

If the person staying overnight is the child's other parent and contributing, the person is not parenting alone.

Edit: Likewise if the parent with the child is living in the family home of their parents, they are not parenting alone: ie, they do not have to pay the full esb bill, full rent/mortage etc. There is other people in the household contributing also

Atlantis50

Malcolm Delicious Tunnel wrote: »

It is defined...."a cohabitant is one of 2 adults (whether of the same or the opposite sex) who live together as a couple in an intimate and committed relationship and who are not related to each other within the prohibited degrees of relationship or married to each other or civil partners of each other".

Also, where a claim is disallowed the onus is then on the Department to satisfy the deciding officer that cohabitation exists in accordance with the criteria.

That is the definition of cohabitation, not "live together".

The SW inspector could consider 3 "sleepovers" as living together.

Fittle

The Department of Social Protection do not have the resources to send out an inspector to a person who has stayed one night in her boyfriends home, to investigate if she is cohabiting with him.

They do however, act on reports of cohabiting couples (where one person is claiming to be living alone), and base their investigation on photographic or documentary evidence over a period of the previous (approx) 6 months.

Perhaps your friend is not being truthful with you OP - that inspector would only have called out to his girlfriend if she has evidence to suggest that she had been living with him, and would most certainly not have gone near her if she only stayed with him once.

Tordelback

Fittle wrote: »

They do however, act on reports of cohabiting couples (where one person is claiming to be living alone), and base their investigation on photographic or documentary evidence over a period of the previous (approx) 6 months.

Aye, and they have presumably quite enough to do with looking into the many thousands of people who are actually cohabiting and claiming OPF for years, without chasing someone who spent one night in someone else's home.

If this was said to your friend, could it be that some so-and-so has falsely and maliciously reported her for cohabiting, and that the 'even one night' thing is a badly-communicated caution that a report has been made? While I have a lot of sympathy for SW officials and the job they do, and most of the ones I've encountered have been pleasant and professional, there's no question that some have adopted bad attitudes and manners in their dealings with claimants, even if it's just making a poor choice of phrase. We can all be very sensitive to language when we feel we're being judged by an all-powerful authority.

d9oiu2wk07blr5

keredern wrote: »

A claimant does not need to know anything about the relevant legislation to successfully appeal a refusal.

It is the Appeals Officer's job to review the case & apply the legislation accordingly.

This may result in the appeal being won or the decision of the Deciding Officer being upheld.

Very few appellants would have any real knowledge of specific legislation but this would have no bearing on the result of their appeal!

Paddy147, it is always very difficult to correctly interpret anecdotal information relating to a case. It's always possible there is more to your friend's case then the details that have been given to you.

In any case, if the lady in question is refused then she should lodge an appeal within 21 days.

Hope it all works out!:)

Social welfare law is the social welfare consolidation Act in addition to the operational guidelines setting out the rules and criteria governing each scheme and the operational guidelines explains the criteria that must be met for determining whether cohabitation exists or not.

d9oiu2wk07blr5

cee_jay wrote: »

No, the onus is on the applicant, either at the time of making a claim or when under review, to satisfy the SW inspector or Deciding Officer that they satisfy the conditions to receive the payment they have applied for.

Where a claim is disallowed, and appealed, again the onus is on the applicant to demonstrate how they satisfy the conditions of the scheme.

The onus is never on the Department to satisfy a deciding officer. A deciding officer for One Parent Family receives a detailed report from a SW Inspector on a One Parent Family Payment applicant and makes the decision from that accordingly.

OP, the opening line from www.welfare.ie on One Parent Family Payment is:


There are a lot of guidelines and conditions to be met in relation to this scheme. The guidelines for cohabitation have been posted earlier on this thread. It does not say in any guidelines that you can have someone stay overnight for x nights of the week (or not as the case may be). Your friend not being the father of the child has nothing to do with the decision.
A social welfare inspector meets with the applicant to determine the facts in their case, and even if people are stating they live in separate addresses, a claim could be disallowed based on information gleaned by the Social Welfare Inspector during the course of the investigation. This is based on interviewing the claimant, observations on the claimants address, and in some cases local knowledge. Even if they state they are not living in the same address, but are supporting one another, and the address situation is contrived to receive social welfare payments, a payment can be disallowed (I am not saying this is the case here, but just pointing out that it is possible).
As I have stated, the onus of proof is on the applicant.

Your friend's girlfriend can appeal any decision made by the Department.

You are correct there is an onus on the claimant to satisfy the sw inspector that cohabitation doesn't exist but there is also an onus on the inspector to satisfy the deciding officer why a claim should be disallowed....they have to give reasons why a claim should be disallowed...such as a person is over the means threshold and how they came to that conclusion etc....and the request under FOI seeking access to those documents should explain those reasons.

cee_jay

paddy147 wrote: »

Inspector called to the girlfriends family house at 10am on the morning in question.Inspector left a letter with the girlfriends parents,as girlfriend wasnt at home (out on a walk after morning school run).

The inspector left in a letter stating the time she called,and she also SUMMONSED the girlfriend up to the SW office for 2:30pm that very same day.
The letter also stated that if she failed to show up at 2:30pm that same day,then OPF allowence would be cut off.

The Inspector said in the meeting,that it had been noted,that the girlfriend was seen going to another addess/house (the boyfriends house) in the late morning/early daytime (before the school pickup run).

It was also said to her about her co-owning the house with the boyfriend and if she had a mortgage on the house.She stated NO,as she had recently come out of/finished up college and couldnt get any work,so how could she get a mortgage and co own any house??

She was then grilled about her relationship with her boyfriend and whether it was a seruious relationship and if there was a future for her and the boyfriend.

Then she was grilled about her looking for a job and what she was doing with her spare time.

Then she was asked to produce (ASAP) up to date bank statements that prove she lives/resides at her family house and also written proof that she doesnt own any part of the boyfriends house,or have a mortgage with him.





Is this right for a SW officer to grill a person like this and pre judge and more or less threaten someone like this??????

the inspector is doing their job questioning the claimant on their current circumstances and requesting information re: same from them.
It is a means tested payment, so they can be requested to produce bank statements and proof of address at any stage.
I don't see anything completely off the wall with the questions being asked there - if she was seen coming and going from another house early morning, then I would be asking questions of the inspector as to why she wasn't questioned on that!
She was grilled on the relationship so the inspector could establish what the lie of the land is - she is claiming a one parent family payment after all - she should be expected to be asked about any relationship she may be in when this is the payment she is claiming.