# Fees for third-level students - assessed on parents' incomes?



## csirl (12 Aug 2008)

*Moderator's note: At the posters' request, I have moved to this new thread a number of posts originally made in a **Shooting the Breeze thread** about what might 'become unfashionable in a recession'.*
*DrMoriarty*



> I got to thinking about how unfashionable some things might become when listening to the fees debate on the radio.


 
Must be a slow time for the journalists - assessing students for fees based on their parents incomes is illegal and so will never be reintroduced - for same reasons as assessing children for fees for old folks homes. Government has aleady been very badly burnt on this issue and is fully aware of the legal situation. 

Only income that you could assess for student fees is the students own income which is pointless as students cant work full time and the only way fees could be reintroduced is to do one of those student loan schemes they have elsewhere where student pays back money when in full time employment after graduation.


----------



## ubiquitous (12 Aug 2008)

*Re: What will become Unfashionable in a recession*



csirl said:


> assessing students for fees based on their parents incomes is illegal and so will never be reintroduced - for same reasons as assessing children for fees for old folks homes. Government has aleady been very badly burnt on this issue and is fully aware of the legal situation.



Is this true? Maintenance Grants for third-level students are still assessed based on their parents incomes.


----------



## csirl (12 Aug 2008)

*Re: What will become Unfashionable in a recession*



> Is this true? Maintenance Grants for third-level students are still assessed based on their parents incomes


 
In the eyes of the law, parents have no responsibilty for their children once they reach 18 years of age - and also children have no responsibility for their parents. They are independent legal entities with no legal obligation or interdependence on each other. 

It is not permissible to assess a benefit on one independent adult based on the income of the other legally independent adult. 

This area of law was trashed out in an Ombudsmans report in the mid to late 1990s looking at assessing family incomes for elderly parents in nursing homes - was the genesis of the arguments which led to the abolishment of such fees and the current repayment scheme scandal and also (though never admitted by Government, who used it for political gain) led to the abolishment of third level fees.

I dont see how maintenance grants could possibly be based on parents income - there is no legal basis for this. I suspect there is an element of "try it on" with the local authorities (?) who administer these grants and that anyone who ever complains does not get assessed. I smell another "nursing home repayment" scandal here and IMHO, any public service officials who are adminstering the scheme in the knowledge that it is illegal should be fired.


----------



## truthseeker (12 Aug 2008)

*Re: What will become Unfashionable in a recession*

csirl - not disputing anything you say but is a child not considered a dependant as long as they are in third level education? 
The reason I ask is a recent situation with a friend who is separated and her solicitor told her the family home cannot be sold until youngest child is 18 OR 22 if in third level education. This would imply that a child is considered a dependant until after third level education (presumably only if child went straight from school to college and was not a mature student returning to college after a number of years off working).

I was also under the impression that maintenance grants were assessed based on parents income (and other factors).

Admittedly I myself finished formal education in 1997 so perhaps the Ombudsman report you refer to was after that, but until 1997 my maintenance grant was based on my parents income, as was the case for all of my friends who were in different colleges and from different parts of the country.


----------



## csirl (12 Aug 2008)

*Re: What will become Unfashionable in a recession*



> but is a child not considered a dependant as long as they are in third level education?


 
The answer is in your comment, they are no longer a "child" once they reach 18. The age of majority in Ireland is 18 full stop. Where is the Law which states that a parent must pay their childs third level education costs? Doesnt exist. You cant have the assessment law without the legal obligation to pay law. Consider the situation whereby a child does not get a grant based on parents income and the parents thru estrangement, principal or some other reason simply dont support the students costs.

The family law issue does not involve benefits received from the State and so the legal argument is not the same? 

Perhaps this should be moved to its own thread?


----------



## truthseeker (12 Aug 2008)

*Re: What will become Unfashionable in a recession*



csirl said:


> The answer is in your comment, they are no longer a "child" once they reach 18. The age of majority in Ireland is 18 full stop. Where is the Law which states that a parent must pay their childs third level education costs? Doesnt exist. You cant have the assessment law without the legal obligation to pay law. Consider the situation whereby a child does not get a grant based on parents income and the parents thru estrangement, principal or some other reason simply dont support the students costs.
> 
> The family law issue does not involve benefits received from the State and so the legal argument is not the same?
> 
> Perhaps this should be moved to its own thread?


 
Oh yes, I know the age of majority is 18, but did assume that it was because you were a dependant that the maintenance grant was assessed based on parental income. Im sure there is no law that states parents are obliged to pay their kids college fees. In the situation where parents dont support the child (of which I knew a few in that boat), the child (or student) still applied for the maintenance grant based on parental income and then they all had part time jobs to make up the money to pay rent etc... Back in my day if you went to a college/university a certain distance from your home your maintenance grant was higher to allow you to pay rent. But you werent entitled to any social welfare payments as a full time student - only the maintenance grant. I just wasnt aware that this practice was illegal as you state. 

In saying that - I can only conjecture based on how it was when I was a full time student, I have no idea how things changed after I left third level education.


----------



## csirl (12 Aug 2008)

*Re: What will become Unfashionable in a recession*

Like SW law, you could assess someone according to their needs i.e. if someone was provided with free accommodation by a relative (parent?), friend or whoever, you could give them a lower maintenance grant than someone who doesnt have access free accommodation. But this would still not involve parental income. And if they decided they wanted to live on their own and rent or the accommodation provider decides he/she doesnt want to provide the accommodation, they'd have to be paid the full amount. 

This issue is a classic example of a problem with a lot of sectors of the public service in Ireland. They add their own layer of rules based on what they think is fair, but quite often there is no basis in law for the rules. Also, in my experience, a lot of public servants do not make an effort to keep up to speed with legal judgements, rulings, ombudsmans cases etc. that have an impact on their areas and so repeat mistakes that have been made before.

If you read the Ombudsmans reports on the nursing homes, it refers to some health boards giving full payment to people who's relatives refused to cooperate with income assessments or who complained about it - they did this on the quiet so that the majority of the public would not be tipped off. I would bet that the same is happening with student maintenance grants. 

Mod - can you transfer this topic to different thread?


----------



## ubiquitous (12 Aug 2008)

*Re: What will become Unfashionable in a recession*



csirl said:


> The answer is in your comment, they are no longer a "child" once they reach 18.



Not correct. Legislation often refers to "child" as meaning the son or daughter of an individual regardless of their own age, for example here in the Capital Acquisitions Tax Consolidation Act 2003:

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2003/en/act/pub/0001/sched2.html#sched2



> "the donee or successor is on that day the child, or minor child of a deceased child, of the disponer,..."



The reference to "minor child" means a child who is under 18 years old.


----------



## csirl (12 Aug 2008)

*Re: What will become Unfashionable in a recession*



> Not correct. Legislation often refers to "child" as meaning the son or daughter of an individual regardless of their own age, for example here in the Capital Acquisitions Tax Consolidation Act 2003:
> 
> [broken link removed]


 
You're correct.

Where I say child, I mean a minor.

The Age of Majority Act is probably the most relevent in this case - incidently one of the exceptions to 18 it specifically allows is for 21 to be used for family law maintenance. No exception for any education Acts.


----------



## gailey (28 Jan 2009)

Sorry I am confused. My daughter has recently sent in the cao forms. There is only one wage coming into the house at the moment. We have 3 children altogether. My daughter is working saturdays at the moment earning 40 euro per week. There is no way we can afford the fees and I assumed that she would be intitled to maintenance grant. Is there any one in the know that would know whether we would have to pay the fees.
What costs will we have? Her first 3 choices is a local college so if she gets her first choice she will not have to pay rent or living expenses
Please put my mind at rest I have looked on websites but I am getting more confused.


----------



## sandrat (28 Jan 2009)

there are no fees, just registration fees of up to €1000, if she is living at home she won't get a grant. Check out Maintenance grant schemes for students on third-level courses on citizens information


----------



## gailey (28 Jan 2009)

Thanks for the link. I did read this before and I thought she would be intitled to part maintenance because she would be living within 24 kms from the college. I also thought the registration fees were going up to €1800. How should this be paid. Does it have to paid in one go before she starts college or do they look for a deposit and then the rest after she starts. I dont know how I am going to manage this. Her sister will be starting secondary school as well next year. I am terrified now I was thinking my eldest would get a grant which would cover fees.
Quote:
The adjacent rate of maintenance grant is payable where the student lives 24 kilometres or less from the college he/she plans to attend. The non-adjacent rate applies to everyone else, including all mature students both dependent and independent


----------



## Ciadan (28 Jan 2009)

Gailey - If your daughter qualifies for a maintenance grant, then her registration fee will also be paid.  You need to get onto your Local Authority, Higher Education Grants section.  The closing date for applications is usually some time in May I think.


----------



## gailey (28 Jan 2009)

Thanks for help. I would need a degree to understand all of this. I didnt even know what a cao form was a few weeks ago.  I will ring them tomorrow and see what they say.


----------



## MOB (29 Jan 2009)

"Where is the Law which states that a parent must pay their childs third level education costs? Doesnt exist. "

Not entirely true, I'm afraid.   If it were, it would come as welcome news to the many separated\divorced parents ordered by our courts to continue paying maintenance in respect of children over 18 but still in full time education.

We are not alone in this.  I recall reading of a case in Italy where maintenance was ordered to be paid for a son who lived at home with his mother, even though he was in his thirties........


----------

