thinking of living together

Hi everyone

As we often seem to be mentioning, if you'd like to discuss benefits policy then please do it on the Discussion Time board. In the meantime if you can't directly help the original poster please don't post on this thread.

Thanks!

Andrea

MSE_Andrea wrote: »

Hi everyone

As we often seem to be mentioning, if you'd like to discuss benefits policy then please do it on the Discussion Time board. In the meantime if you can't directly help the original poster please don't post on this thread.

Thanks!

Andrea

Ok Andrea.

Advice for the OP. Under the present benefits system, you are far far better off financially living apart from your children's father and claiming from your current partner, the state. Things might alter if you claim maintenance from your boyfriend, or if the CSA make a claim against him. But bear in mind that if either of these happen, he will not have spare cash to buy presents for the kids.

The downside is that your joint kids are missing a father and a genuine home-life, and he could be (I do not say "is") leading the life of a bachelor gay.

Why not have a word with him and ask if he will provide a bungalow for you to live in and promise to pay the council tax and give you the same amount that you receive from the government each week? If he can not give the cast-iron guarantees that your present existence does, then stick with your present life-style and money-provider.

Your choice really.

terryw

briona wrote: »

You are committing fraud by claiming benefits as a lone parent when you have a long-term partner. The fact that your partner is the father of your 9 month old baby would suggest that this is not a recent relationship.

Whilst its commendable that you are now considering doing the "right thing" and actually supporting yourselves (albeit only if you don't lose any benefits), you may find that the decision is quickly taken out of your hands. All it takes is a neighbour to report you to DWP...

Continuing to live as you are is a risk – but only YOU can decide if it's a risk worth taking...

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/campaigns/benefit-thieves/index.asp

Briona, I am on your side. But please look at my post above:
"Yep, got to agree. BUT the strongest possible indicator in deciding if they are is a couple is that if one of the two has their own dwelling which they provide for at their own expense, and there are no financial links between the pair. Most "couples" in this situation ensure that there are absolutely no checkable financial links. (I am not referring to the OP here) Things like sharing the same dentist or going on holiday together are by themselves absolutely useless in deciding if a couple are LTAHAW.

I realize that the non-working "partner" is not being fair to the child(ren), themself or the rest of the tax-paying community in deciding to have the state as their partner, but with the financial incentives given by the government and the basic greed in human nature it is hardly surprising that this happens to the extent that it does.

terryw"

If the boyfriend of the OP does not have a financial relationship with the OP, then regardless of feelings then there is no case to answer as regards fraud.



terryw

terryw wrote: »

If the boyfriend of the OP does not have a financial relationship with the OP, then regardless of feelings then there is no case to answer as regards fraud

Although it's pretty sad, I can understand the desire to maximise the benefits one can claim. The big problem though is that if someone reports them and they are put under surveillance and the partner is seen staying over several times a week, questions about whether the OP really IS a lone parent will obviously be asked. And if she is claiming as a lone parent whilst actually being in a long term relationship, she IS committing fraud.

Someone simply visiting their child would be more likely to do that during daytime hours or early evening after they had finished work. It's highly likely (assuming they live nearby) that they would stay overnight. Which takes me back to surveillance and the potential for the partner to be observed staying overnight.

So I guess my point to the OP was really just to weigh up the risks of being caught out... You may get away with it, you may not but if I was in her situation, the risk of being caught out and the potential consequences would far outweigh the pleasure of a few extra pounds in my pocket each week...