# Single or cohabitant a BIG difference!



## lostnfound (6 Aug 2014)

After quitting my job (because of behaviour of employer) I claimed Jobseekers payment. Got a letter about means saying I lose €194 of my payment because of cohabitant boyfriend. He brings home €340 a week however his wages are counted as €400 (before tax) in the means test. After all I get only €118 which is ridiculuously little. I have no savings at all.
Does the law really say that BF HAS TO give me 60% of his earnings? We have a joint account so I can't claim myself as a single. Or can I change it now? We shared all rent and bills but personal expenses were covered from our own wages. Now I have to ask him for money. We are not married, can I say that we are only sharing the apartment?


----------



## gipimann (6 Aug 2014)

You've got a joint account, have shared rent and bills, and you've already declared you're a couple  - difficult to show that you're single and not cohabiting.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (6 Aug 2014)

Hi gipimann

I am trying to figure out the rationale for this. 

If Johnny and Mary share a flat but are not a couple, Johnny's income would be ignored. 

If they share a bed or a bank account, her income is reduced.  Of course, if they were  married, her income would be reduced as well. 

Are people better off staying single?


----------



## lostnfound (6 Aug 2014)

Soon my lease is over and have to move. Along with the new address can I say we are not a couple any more yet we share an apartment? Also we can separate the accounts. Does it make any sense?


----------



## mandelbrot (6 Aug 2014)

Well it'd be fraud, and very thinly veiled...


----------



## dub_nerd (7 Aug 2014)

You *are* a couple.


----------



## Jim2007 (7 Aug 2014)

lostnfound said:


> Soon my lease is over and have to move. Along with the new address can I say we are not a couple any more yet we share an apartment? Also we can separate the accounts. Does it make any sense?



Seriously how stupid do you think these people are?  They are professional with years of experience at this game and it will probably take them less than 5 minutes to see exactly what is going on.  And then all the remains to be decided is if they are going to take action against you for social security fraud!


----------



## vandriver (7 Aug 2014)

If you want the figures checked for accuracy,post them here.


----------



## Sunny (7 Aug 2014)

Jim2007 said:


> Seriously how stupid do you think these people are? They are professional with years of experience at this game and it will probably take them less than 5 minutes to see exactly what is going on. And then all the remains to be decided is if they are going to take action against you for social security fraud!


 
I know married people who have split up and yet remain living in the same property because neither can afford to move. 

And that is not to say that I think the OP should defraud the system. 

It is typically Irish that cohabiting couples are jointly assessed like a married couple when it comes to social welfare benefits and yet when it comes to tax credits, they are considered single. The State shouldn't be able to have it both ways. It is grossly unfair.


----------



## niceoneted (7 Aug 2014)

Sunny totally agree with this - It is typically Irish that cohabiting couples are jointly assessed like a married couple when it comes to social welfare benefits and yet when it comes to tax credits, they are considered single. The State shouldn't be able to have it both ways. It is grossly unfair. 

I have only in the last week wrote to the Ministers for Finance and Social protection in relation to this.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (7 Aug 2014)

An interesting anomaly. I can't think of any justification for it. 

Are there other anomalies like this which could form the basis of a pre-Budget submission?


----------



## suarez (7 Aug 2014)

Brendan Burgess said:


> An interesting anomaly. I can't think of any justification for it.
> 
> Are there other anomalies like this which could form the basis of a pre-Budget submission?



If 2 single people are living together and they are both signing on - they will get 188 each per week (total household income 376 per week) - even if they are sharing bills for rent, gas, elec, TV, Broadband etc. A co-habiting or married (childless couple) receive 312 per week.  That's a differential of 64 per week (3328 per annum) for 2 people facing exactly the same bills.  Can people really be blamed for attempting to avoid such an arbitrarily unfair and illogical system?
Other long standing, and oft discussed, anomalies include; penalising people who work a 20 hour week - spread over 5 days as opposed to over 3 days.  One receives 2 days payment from SW whereas the other receives nothing.  I remember listening to Joan Burton waffling on about this particulr issue - when in oppostion - and yet she never managed to fix it in her 3 years plus as Minister for Social Protection.  
She was probably too busy devising ways to make it impossible to get rent allowance in a major city or in leading PR campaigns about she was tackling the levels of fraud in the SW system.


----------



## gipimann (7 Aug 2014)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Hi gipimann
> 
> I am trying to figure out the rationale for this.
> 
> ...



Brendan,
Two people living at the same address who are not a couple have no liability to maintain each other in respect of SW entitlements.  This can apply to flatmates, house-sharers or even parents and adult children (over 25 for jobseeker claimants).

A couple, whether married, civil partners or cohabiting, are assessed jointly for means-tested payments.

As suarez explained, 2 single people with individual SW claims will receive more in SW than a couple.  This does create a situation where people may make inaccurate declarations regarding their circumstances.


----------



## gianni (8 Aug 2014)

niceoneted said:


> Sunny totally agree with this - It is typically Irish that cohabiting couples are jointly assessed like a married couple when it comes to social welfare benefits and yet when it comes to tax credits, they are considered single. The State shouldn't be able to have it both ways. It is grossly unfair.
> 
> I have only in the last week wrote to the Ministers for Finance and Social protection in relation to this.




I was in a similar situation, albeit 10 years ago, and was struck then about the double standards applied. I wrote to the minister of the day too - I wouldn't hold my breath in your case...


----------

