nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Denied JSA due to partner

Habata

I lost my job and moved in with my partner. And have been denied jsa for that reason. Is that normal? Is there any way I can appeal? Seems very unfair. And I feel very stupid for not just saying I lived with a friend. There's no transfers between us. I'm not getting money from them. So why would I be denied jsa

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

SourSessions

Unfortunately, co-habiting is considered the same as married in terms of social welfare, ie, your partner is fully assessed for means. There's no way to appeal that.

Habata

How do they justify it? What's the legal basis?
Seems insane. If I wasn't having sex with my housemate I would have jsa? Has anyone fought this? Legally speaking the state doesn't see us as being in a relationship.

hawthorne

Habata wrote: »

How do they justify it? What's the legal basis?
Seems insane. If I wasn't having sex with my housemate I would have jsa? Has anyone fought this? Legally speaking the state doesn't see us as being in a relationship.

Unfortunately has been like that for years.
I do not know if anyone ever fought it.
You can be sure this regulation would not be there anymore if that person had won. It concerns so many.
To my knowledge there is nothing you can do about it.
By the way- it is not about having sex or not having sex with each other.You are living with your friend. You are cohabitating. You share the same household.
The only way out of this is moving out again.

jrosen

Where you on JSB?

JSA is means tested, so when you live with someone their income is taken into account.

JustAThought

jrosen wrote: »

Where you on JSB?

JSA is means tested, so when you live with someone their income is taken into account.

As you’d had to have provided their employer, salary,pension, PAYE etc details in the form and they would have had assumedly to give them to you presumably its a lot more that ‘flatmates’.

Habata

hawthorne wrote: »

Unfortunately has been like that for years.
I do not know if anyone ever fought it.
You can be sure this regulation would not be there anymore if that person had won. It concerns so many.
To my knowledge there is nothing you can do about it.
By the way- it is not about having sex or not having sex with each other.You are living with your friend. You are cohabitating. You share the same household.
The only way out of this is moving out again.

If I had a ordinary housemate their income wouldn't be taken into account right? If the finances are the same than why is who I'm sleeping with making any difference

punisher5112

Habata wrote: »

If I had a ordinary housemate their income wouldn't be taken into account right? If the finances are the same than why is who I'm sleeping with making any difference

Because you are together.

If you were house sharing then that's different as you wouldn't be a couple....

Habata

punisher5112 wrote: »

Because you are together.

If you were house sharing then that's different as you wouldn't be a couple....

If I lived with a friend i wouldn't be accessed this way.

Does it just come down to who I'm having sex with?

Because spitting rent with a friend is financially the same as splitting with a partner.

My means are no different. My partner isn't supporting me.

[Deleted User]

Habata wrote: »

If I lived with a friend i wouldn't be accessed this way.

Does it just come down to who I'm having sex with?

Because spitting rent with a friend is financially the same as splitting with a partner.

My means are no different. My partner isn't supporting me.

You have a partner who has a decent income, the line has to drawn somewhere. If you're receiving nothing your partner would be 30k+.

This money doesn't grow on trees, it comes from taxes and shouldnt be paid to people who's partners can provide for them.

Since you're not entitled to JB, you haven't paid into the pot you're looking to draw from.
Seems perfectly fair to me to be honest.

Recliner

Habata wrote: »

If I lived with a friend i wouldn't be accessed this way.

Does it just come down to who I'm having sex with?

Because spitting rent with a friend is financially the same as splitting with a partner.

My means are no different. My partner isn't supporting me.

Honestly are you for real?
The powers that be don't give a toss about your sex life. They do however give a toss if you are living together as a couple.
I've house shared and co-habited. 2 completely different things. You're co-habiting.
I'm assuming that you're very young, this isn't a news flash to most people.
And I know I'll probably get a yellow card for this but it's "assessed" not "accessed".

Habata

gilberto_eire wrote: »

You have a partner who has a decent income, the line has to drawn somewhere. If you're receiving nothing your partner would be 30k+.

This money doesn't grow on trees, it comes from taxes and shouldnt be paid to people who's partners can provide for them.

Since you're not entitled to JB, you haven't paid into the pot you're looking to draw from.
Seems perfectly fair to me to be honest.

I've more than paid my share of taxes. This is my first time being unemployed. Thanks for your input and insight.

I can't understand how if I was sharing with someone else I would get JSA.

Habata

Recliner wrote: »

Honestly are you for real?
The powers that be don't give a toss about your sex life. They do however give a toss if you are living together as a couple.
I've house shared and co-habited. 2 completely different things. You're co-habiting.

JSA payment is about means. Explain to me whats different about means between sharing and co-habiting?

Smee_Again

Habata wrote: »

I've more than paid my share of taxes. This is my first time being unemployed.

I can't understand how if I was sharing with someone else I would get JSA. If my partner was supporting me or we had joint finances I would understand it. But this makes no sense.

Social Welfare assumes that your partner is supporting you so it makes perfect sense.

It’s really that simple.

punisher5112

If you lived at home with your parents it would be exactly the same and means tested.

Habata

Smee_Again wrote: »

Social Welfare assumes that your partner is supporting you so it makes perfect sense.

It’s really that simple.

They've no basis for that.

Smee_Again

Habata wrote: »

I've more than paid my share of taxes. This is my first time being unemployed.

If this is true then why are you being means tested, surely you should be on JSB which is based on your previous contributions.

Smee_Again

Habata wrote: »

They've no basis for that.

Their money their rules.

rev2.0

Habata wrote: »

I've more than paid my share of taxes. This is my first time being unemployed. Thanks for your input and insight.

I can't understand how if I was sharing with someone else I would get JSA. If my partner was supporting me or we had joint finances I would understand it. But this makes no sense.

If you have more than paid your fair share of taxes, and it’s your 1st time being unemployed then I’m assuming you only started to work in mid 2018 or later?? If 39 PRSI contributions are made in the relevant tax year (2018 in this case) then you would be entitled to the non means tested jobseekers benefit.

Habata

So couple A1 and A2, and couple B1 and B2.

A1 lives with B1, and A2 lives with B2. Everyone that's entitled to JSA gets it?

But, if A1 lives with A2, and B1 lives with B2. It's treated completely differently?

How does that make sense?

blackbox

Why is your partner not supporting you?

Habata

rev2.0 wrote: »

If you have more than paid your fair share of taxes, and it’s your 1st time being unemployed then I’m assuming you only started to work in mid 2018 or later?? If 39 PRSI contributions are made in the relevant tax year (2018 in this case) then you would be entitled to the non means tested jobseekers benefit.

no.

Habata

Smee_Again wrote: »

Their money their rules.

Thanks for your insight.

Morrisp

Habata wrote: »

They've no basis for that.

Fully agree with you

Habata

Is there a threshold? If two students move in after being together a week, are they co-habiting? Are they treated as a joint income?

mickdw

The rules are abit mad but as said, they have to draw a line somewhere. You cant have a partner of someone earning big money getting a dole payment unquestioned.
Living with a partner is very different to a house share.
You likely save on rent for a start.
Move out and get your full entitlement.
Marriage also seems terribly unfair imo.
If you have one part of a couple with good work and the other traditionally in broken employment, as single people, one would get dole if out of work. As soon as married or living together, no dole if one is out of work

Habata

mickdw wrote: »

The rules are abit mad but as said, they have to draw a line somewhere. You cant have a partner of someone earning big money getting a dole payment unquestioned.
Living with a partner is very different to a house share.
You likely save on rent for a start.
Move out and get your full entitlement.
Marriage also seems terribly unfair imo.
If you have one part of a couple with good work and the other traditionally in broken employment, as single people, one would get dole if out of work. As soon as married or living together, no dole if one is out of work

Marriage you can share tax credits. Huge difference.

jj880

rev2.0 wrote: »

If you have more than paid your fair share of taxes, and it’s your 1st time being unemployed then I’m assuming you only started to work in mid 2018 or later?? If 39 PRSI contributions are made in the relevant tax year (2018 in this case) then you would be entitled to the non means tested jobseekers benefit.

Looking at OPs post history it seems JSB entitlement has run out and they then applied for JSA and it got denied.

OP it's a sh!t one but these are the rules. People in this forum are very helpful. They will help you clear up what your options are. Im not sure debating the injustice of the rules here will do you any good. You may want to take that up with your local politician.

Irishphotodesk

Smee_Again wrote: »

Social Welfare assumes that your partner is supporting you so it makes perfect sense.

It’s really that simple.

Habata wrote: »

They've no basis for that.

OP, who is paying for your rent, food, electricity bills, gas bills ?

is it
A) you ?

Your partner ?
C) the state

If your answer is B, then your partner IS supporting you, he/she may not be physically giving you money to do as you wish, but they are paying and supporting you.

jrosen

Rules are there to maintain some level of control. There has to be a cut off.

You have been claiming JSB for what? Approx 9 months and you have exhausted it. You are living with someone and in a relationship. Therefore there is a reasonable assumption you have support, hence the cut off. If your boyf was unemployed you would likely have qualified for JSA, if he had a low salary you would have.

But he is neither unemployed or low paid therefore it means you miss the cut off.

There is nothing unfair about it! It’s just the rules

Smee_Again

Habata wrote: »

Marriage you can share tax credits. Huge difference.

FWIW I think it’s unfair that cohabitating couples are treated as one for social welfare purposes but not for tax purposes.

But thems the rules.

I also know from experience that if you happen to flat share with a person of the opposite sex Intreo will make a home visit to check on the living situation.