Thread Closed  
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
28-11-2020, 21:52   #76
GarIT
Registered User
 
GarIT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habata View Post
A young couple start going out. Move in temporarily after a week . Seems different to a couple who have lived together for ten years. Or someone staying on a couch after losing a job again temporarily. It doesn't seem reasonable for the state to treat all of those as single financial units
If that was the rule everyone would say their arrangement was new or temporary
GarIT is offline  
Thanks from:
Advertisement
28-11-2020, 23:09   #77
wench
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 903
When I worked there (fadó, fadó) we were told it stems from the constitutional protection of the family, which is based on marriage.

A married couple are jointly assessed, and therefore the same rules apply to other household setups such as cohabiting couples.
This is to ensure that they are not treated more favourably by the system than a married couple.

As I said on your other thread, this approach can have benefits too, as a cohabitant can claim an ADA for their partner.
wench is offline  
28-11-2020, 23:29   #78
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 157
You should apply for Job Seekers Benefit and become part of the JOBSEEKERS scheme where you are supposed to be actively seeking employment. You are entitled to this and it is not means tested. Apply straight away.
Liamo57 is offline  
Thanks from:
30-11-2020, 14:27   #79
Jambonjunior
Registered User
 
Jambonjunior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 142
This has been an education.

I never would have thought that if your girlfriend or boyfriend lost their job and moved in but paid they're way, that you would be treated as a family unit automatically.
Jambonjunior is offline  
(2) thanks from:
30-11-2020, 23:44   #80
fantaiscool
Registered User
 
fantaiscool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jambonjunior View Post
This has been an education.

I never would have thought that if your girlfriend or boyfriend lost their job and moved in but paid they're way, that you would be treated as a family unit automatically.



As i've said before on here, you have to educate yourself and be careful in how you deal with SW.
fantaiscool is online now  
(2) thanks from:
Advertisement
01-12-2020, 00:54   #81
Geuze
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habata View Post
And no JSA. So why is my insurance premium the same?
PRSI is used to finance JSB.

JSA is paid for by general taxes.
Geuze is offline  
01-12-2020, 18:00   #82
Habata
Registered User
 
Habata's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by fantaiscool View Post
As i've said before on here, you have to educate yourself and be careful in how you deal with SW.
Being honest and inexperienced about the system cost me a lot so.
Habata is offline  
(2) thanks from:
02-12-2020, 21:42   #83
ShaShaBear
Registered User
 
ShaShaBear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habata View Post
Being honest and inexperienced about the system cost me a lot so.
Lying and getting caught would do you no favours either. If this is the level of complaint you take from Social Welfare following the rules, then I hate to think what would happen if you had lied, gotten approved and then had to pay every penny back.

When my partner moved in with me, I informed Social Welfare on the first day. We had not been living together more than an hour. Because a single family unit has nothing to do with sex as you repeatedly put it, but the presence of more than one individual with an income capable of supporting all members of the household. Naturally, they would assume that two people with a relationship that decide to share a home would also share finances to some extent. Just like if you moved in with your parents, you would be assessed on their earnings because they also have the capability to support you by sharing finances. And I presume you don't have sex with your parents?
ShaShaBear is offline  
02-12-2020, 22:14   #84
anewme
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 8,820
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaShaBear View Post
Lying and getting caught would do you no favours either. If this is the level of complaint you take from Social Welfare following the rules, then I hate to think what would happen if you had lied, gotten approved and then had to pay every penny back.

When my partner moved in with me, I informed Social Welfare on the first day. We had not been living together more than an hour. Because a single family unit has nothing to do with sex as you repeatedly put it, but the presence of more than one individual with an income capable of supporting all members of the household. Naturally, they would assume that two people with a relationship that decide to share a home would also share finances to some extent. Just like if you moved in with your parents, you would be assessed on their earnings because they also have the capability to support you by sharing finances. And I presume you don't have sex with your parents?
The point bring though, the Revenue have it both ways.

They are expecting the partner to support with earnings, while at the same time not allowing the partner not working transfer their tax free allowance to the partner supporting them.

So its assessed on income as a couple/family but on allowances as single.
anewme is offline  
Thanks from:
Advertisement
02-12-2020, 23:37   #85
Raichu
Registered User
 
Raichu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 892
Quote:
Originally Posted by anewme View Post
The point bring though, the Revenue have it both ways.

They are expecting the partner to support with earnings, while at the same time not allowing the partner not working transfer their tax free allowance to the partner supporting them.

So its assessed on income as a couple/family but on allowances as single.
The Department of Revenue is not the Department Of Employment Affairs and Social Protection, so in this case the revenue is irrelevant because it’s the DEASP who are assessing this as a family unit. Even if revenue did it wouldn’t make any difference in the OPs case.
Raichu is offline  
Thanks from:
02-12-2020, 23:55   #86
anewme
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 8,820
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raichu View Post
The Department of Revenue is not the Department Of Employment Affairs and Social Protection, so in this case the revenue is irrelevant because it’s the DEASP who are assessing this as a family unit. Even if revenue did it wouldn’t make any difference in the OPs case.
It's the Government and there should be joined up thinking, it oh, you are a family here, but not here.

Either you are a unit, or not.

If the OP was not working, could she not tra safer her tax free allowance to her partner if he was on higher tax if they were a family unit?
anewme is offline  
Thanks from:
03-12-2020, 01:52   #87
fantaiscool
Registered User
 
fantaiscool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raichu View Post
The Department of Revenue is not the Department Of Employment Affairs and Social Protection, so in this case the revenue is irrelevant because it’s the DEASP who are assessing this as a family unit. Even if revenue did it wouldn’t make any difference in the OPs case.

Thank you for demonstrating the mentality of many people working in deasp.
fantaiscool is online now  
(2) thanks from:
03-12-2020, 19:48   #88
Raichu
Registered User
 
Raichu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 892
Quote:
Originally Posted by fantaiscool View Post
Thank you for demonstrating the mentality of many people working in deasp.
It’s not a mentality it’s a matter of fact.
Raichu is offline  
(2) thanks from:
03-12-2020, 21:30   #89
Habata
Registered User
 
Habata's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaShaBear View Post
. Because a single family unit has nothing to do with sex as you repeatedly put it, but the presence of more than one individual with an income capable of supporting all members of the household. Naturally, they would assume that two people with a relationship that decide to share a home would also share finances to some extent. Just like if you moved in with your parents, you would be assessed on their earnings because they also have the capability to support you by sharing finances. And I presume you don't have sex with your parents?
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.

Last edited by Habata; 03-12-2020 at 22:34.
Habata is offline  
(3) thanks from:
04-12-2020, 13:03   #90
fantaiscool
Registered User
 
fantaiscool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habata View Post
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.

many of the people working in deasp think that way though - "thats just how it is". even if it's not really like that. don't expect them to have empathy. if you understand their mentality you can better equip yourself in dealing with them.
fantaiscool is online now  
Thanks from:
Thread Closed

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search