Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Denied JSA due to partner

124»

Comments

  • #92
    XVII
    Registered Users Posts: 338 ✭✭XVII


    OP, I know that it seems unfair to you (and it is considering your situation), but there are lot of rules implemented to avoid specific situations, be it on government level, work, etc. In this specific case, it could be this:
    Buddy Bubs wrote: »
    The answer to your question is that cohabiting couples are deemed a financial unit because if one of them decided to give up work to be run the house they could receive the dole indefinitely. There is a threshold which the partner continuing to work must earn above and, your partner must exceed this. My mother, for example, never got benefits when not working for 20 years because my father exceeded the threshold.

    Imagine a situation where your hypothetical 1 week partner _does_ support you when you live together at the same place? Surely it would be unfair to all other people to pay you while you simply stay at home all the time not working?

    This is why SW has no choice but to treat all cohabiting couples in the same way, as they have no way to prove which couples are simply sharing the space and which actually support each other. There is no way for them to know which is which, and that's why they have to assume the "worst" case.


  • #93
    Recliner
    Registered Users Posts: 878 ✭✭✭Recliner


    Habata wrote: »
    And what if the assumptions are wrong?
    There's all sorts of reasons to move into the same house. It doesn't mean the people are a family unit.
    What if the earner isn't supporting the other?
    Imo it's mad to assume that two people that are going out are supporting each other. Usually that's only something that happens after many years.

    It's a weird flex by the government. Double standards regarding the tax credits. And they can make assumptions without having to back it up. And i don't understand how and why the criteria for a qualifying adult doesn't apply to determining a family unit?

    My whole point about this is that there's different levels of "cohabitation". And it should be treated differently. I'm out of work and a difficult time, I'm doing my best to get a job, I've paid my taxes and I'm denied support for unreasonable reasons.

    But if I had a different housemate everything would be fine. Which is why I asked if anyone had ever appealed in a similar situation.

    I know people here don't care, and think I'm trying to convince them of my situation. I'm trying to understand the logic and justification. The replies of "that's just how it is" don't do much.

    But you don't have a house mate. In your case the assumption is correct.
    There aren't different levels of co-habitation, you're either living with someone or you're not. You're living with the person that you're in a relationship with, therefore you are co-habiting. Doesn't matter if it's been 1 week, 1 year or 10 years.
    And TBH, if the going rate is still €203, I can't see how you can possibly pay half the rent plus half of all bills and buy your own food and all and any other sundry items you will need, plus pay any loan/car repayments without some financial support from your OH.
    And if everyone here agreed with you, it still won't change the situation.


  • #94
    atr2002
    Closed Accounts Posts: 96 ✭✭atr2002


    So stay at home parent's should just say they are couch surfing and claim entitlements?

    We're all suckers


  • #95
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    Habata wrote: »
    And what if the assumptions are wrong?
    There's all sorts of reasons to move into the same house. It doesn't mean the people are a family unit.
    What if the earner isn't supporting the other?
    Imo it's mad to assume that two people that are going out are supporting each other. Usually that's only something that happens after many years.

    It's a weird flex by the government. Double standards regarding the tax credits. And they can make assumptions without having to back it up. And i don't understand how and why the criteria for a qualifying adult doesn't apply to determining a family unit?

    My whole point about this is that there's different levels of "cohabitation". And it should be treated differently. I'm out of work and a difficult time, I'm doing my best to get a job, I've paid my taxes and I'm denied support for unreasonable reasons.

    But if I had a different housemate everything would be fine. Which is why I asked if anyone had ever appealed in a similar situation.

    I know people here don't care, and think I'm trying to convince them of my situation. I'm trying to understand the logic and justification. The replies of "that's just how it is" don't do much.

    You are living with your partner. You are a couple living together.
    That's why they take you as a family unit.


  • #96
    anewme
    Registered Users Posts: 11,853 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    bubblypop wrote: »
    You are living with your partner. You are a couple living together.
    That's why they take you as a family unit.

    But not in the eyes of the Revenue.


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    anewme wrote: »
    But not in the eyes of the Revenue.

    No. But in the eyes of social welfare they are. And that's what's important here.
    I don't think it's right either that 2 different government departments treat the same couples differently. But that's the way it is until it is changed.
    So the OP has options, get a job or move house.


  • #98
    Smee_Again
    Registered Users Posts: 1,984 ✭✭✭Smee_Again


    anewme wrote: »
    But not in the eyes of the Revenue.

    So change that rule, not the social welfare rule.


  • #99
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,007 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    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.

    If you werent having sex you probably wouldnt be living there for free?


  • #100
    anewme
    Registered Users Posts: 11,853 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    Smee_Again wrote: »
    So change that rule, not the social welfare rule.

    Absolutely.

    It should be consistent, one way or the other


  • #101
    Habata
    Registered Users Posts: 63 ✭✭Habata


    GreeBo wrote: »
    If you werent having sex you probably wouldnt be living there for free?

    You didn't actually read any of the thread did you.


  • Advertisement
  • #102
    Habata
    Registered Users Posts: 63 ✭✭Habata


    Smee_Again wrote: »
    So change that rule, not the social welfare rule.

    Has does that happen? How would either of the departments change?


  • #103
    Habata
    Registered Users Posts: 63 ✭✭Habata


    Recliner wrote: »
    But you don't have a house mate. In your case the assumption is correct.
    There aren't different levels of co-habitation, you're either living with someone or you're not. .

    The departments own website says otherwise.


  • #104
    Recliner
    Registered Users Posts: 878 ✭✭✭Recliner


    Habata wrote: »
    The departments own website says otherwise.

    OK, I give up.
    You're right and the whole country is wrong.


  • #105
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,007 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Habata wrote: »
    You didn't actually read any of the thread did you.

    I read all the way down to the post I quoted, as is the norm.

    You don't actually like the truth behind the point I'm making, do you?


  • #106
    The J Stands for Jay
    Registered Users Posts: 5,645 ✭✭✭The J Stands for Jay


    Habata wrote: »
    And what if the assumptions are wrong?
    There's all sorts of reasons to move into the same house. It doesn't mean the people are a family unit.
    What if the earner isn't supporting the other?
    Imo it's mad to assume that two people that are going out are supporting each other. Usually that's only something that happens after many years.

    It's a weird flex by the government. Double standards regarding the tax credits. And they can make assumptions without having to back it up. And i don't understand how and why the criteria for a qualifying adult doesn't apply to determining a family unit?

    My whole point about this is that there's different levels of "cohabitation". And it should be treated differently. I'm out of work and a difficult time, I'm doing my best to get a job, I've paid my taxes and I'm denied support for unreasonable reasons.

    But if I had a different housemate everything would be fine. Which is why I asked if anyone had ever appealed in a similar situation.

    I know people here don't care, and think I'm trying to convince them of my situation. I'm trying to understand the logic and justification. The replies of "that's just how it is" don't do much.

    How much rent are you paying now?


  • #107
    Raichu
    Registered Users Posts: 7,502 ✭✭✭Raichu


    OP, your problem isn’t no one is explaining this properly to you, the problem you have I’m afraid is your unwilling to accept the matter of fact as it is. There’s unfortunately no option available but

    1. Go live on your own
    2. Get a job
    3. Submit an appeal with the justifications you provide here

    No one here can help you anymore than has been done, you’ve asked for advice, it’s been giving countless times and each and every time you fight back with the same arguments that have been debunked previously.

    Unfortunately the reality is: in the eyes of DEASP you are being supported financially by your partner. If that’s not the case (as in your paying your own way) then submit an appeal to them and provide them evidence of that & also explain why you need the payment. You can bang the drum and cry it’s not fair all you want, thems the brakes. You don’t have to like it, but those are their rules & if you’re asking for their money then you’re agreeing to abide by them. No one likes rules, especially when they impact negatively on you, but this is just how the world works. It’s not about sex or whatever you keep saying. The fact is either;

    1. You’re paying your own way somehow
    2. Your partner is supporting you by paying rent, food & bills while you live there (support doesn’t = handing you cash every Friday to spend how you like)
    3. You’re not eating and sleeping outside the past few weeks, which I reckon is not the case.

    I suggest you grow up a bit & just go through the appeal. If they deny it then that’s just how it is, the rules won’t be changed because you don’t like it. It’s time to get into the real world. All you want as far as I can see is someone to give you a loop hole or some way around this, of which none exist.


  • #108
    fantaiscool
    Registered Users Posts: 363 ✭✭fantaiscool


    Raichu wrote: »
    OP, your problem isn’t no one is explaining this properly to you, the problem you have I’m afraid is your unwilling to accept the matter of fact as it is. There’s unfortunately no option available but

    1. Go live on your own
    2. Get a job
    3. Submit an appeal with the justifications you provide here

    No one here can help you anymore than has been done, you’ve asked for advice, it’s been giving countless times and each and every time you fight back with the same arguments that have been debunked previously.

    Unfortunately the reality is: in the eyes of DEASP you are being supported financially by your partner. If that’s not the case (as in your paying your own way) then submit an appeal to them and provide them evidence of that & also explain why you need the payment. You can bang the drum and cry it’s not fair all you want, thems the brakes. You don’t have to like it, but those are their rules & if you’re asking for their money then you’re agreeing to abide by them. No one likes rules, especially when they impact negatively on you, but this is just how the world works. It’s not about sex or whatever you keep saying. The fact is either;

    1. You’re paying your own way somehow
    2. Your partner is supporting you by paying rent, food & bills while you live there (support doesn’t = handing you cash every Friday to spend how you like)
    3. You’re not eating and sleeping outside the past few weeks, which I reckon is not the case.

    I suggest you grow up a bit & just go through the appeal. If they deny it then that’s just how it is, the rules won’t be changed because you don’t like it. It’s time to get into the real world. All you want as far as I can see is someone to give you a loop hole or some way around this, of which none exist.


    I think he feels stupid for being honest which has landed him in this situation. He's just venting at this point. He's living a much reduced quality of life on a daily basis than he would had he been knowledgeable about things.



    The thread is serving a purpose in educating people. Hopefully someone reads it before they go and make the same mistake and put themselves in the same situation. It also highlights the mindset of many deasp workers which is an invaluable insight for people who may go in expecting empathy.


    At this point i'm sure he knows his options are what they are. If he knew what he knows now, I'm sure he would done things differently.


  • #109
    cee_jay
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 7,920 Mod ✭✭✭✭cee_jay


    I think this thread has gone as far as it can at this stage.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement