would you consider living apart for financial reasons ?

alwaysonthego_2

lolababy wrote: »

Under the law as it stands even couples can claim benefits whilst living apart. As long as they live apart in separate dwelling and can prove that they do not cohabit then its not seen as fraud.
It becomes fraud under the law if the couple are really living together but saying that one of them live elsewhere and they claim benefits as single people.
Now the question of it being moral to be still a couple but living on benefits in separate dwellings. Well thats down to your feelings on the matter . You can say its fraud but in the eyes of the law it is not.
Now as for you saying that I do not have a clue and im talking claptrap thats your view but not one that is correct.

please can you provide a link for this LAW.

Does your opinion over ride the information ,that I have access to as a CAB adviser, from the CPAG benefits and tax credit advisers book. Which I have used several times to advice clients.

lolababy

Couple decide to live apart case cis/13805/1996. Legal test being part of a household
As soon as one partner intends not to resume living together with the other the absence ceases to be temporary.
The above was a case where a couple no longer lived together and claimed social security. Any couple who live apart in separate households even when married as the above can claim benefits. Even if one partner decides that they want to return to the family home at a later date they are regarded as not being of the same household whilst living in separate houses.

cabvol

to put this into perspective without being accused of spouting clap trap.:rolleyes:

It is a matter of fact whether people are a couple for benefit purposes, no one factor proves this, for example staying over/sexual relationship, shared children or living under the same roof, a combination of these with other factors for example how they appear in public, shared finances and the parties intentions would combine to show that the parties involved are a couple for benefit purposes. If a couples relationship has irretrievably (as far as can be known at the time) broken down and there is no intention to live together as couple in the future then yes they can claim as single people because that is what they are.

It is also possible for a former couple whose relationship has broken down to continue to live under the same roof but as separate households and claim benefits separately. (good luck in proving it though)

The often quoted staying over means you are in cohabitation is a myth. There is some very Grey areas in this and a lot of misinformation.

Marriage and civil relationship status obviously has some bearing on the above. Both parties in a marriage have a duty to maintain the other until the marriage is ended (CSA being an arrangement for the children) (a court order may provide further maintenance arrangements for spouses) the DWP may and often do pursue spouses for payments.

For your information CPAG books are not just for CAB 'experts':rolleyes: but are available to all individual claimants can get a very worth while discount as well. The book is normally £37.00 but for individuals it is available for £8.50. It is also normally available in larger reference libraries. CPAG is a guide to your rights but is not the law for this you will need to study the relevant legislation and case law (commissioners decisions) I would not bother though unless very bored.

Pssst

Sort your own problems out but dont burden the state with them un-necessarily.

The tax payers of this country have enough home grown and foreign parasites without adding to the pile.

alwaysonthego_2

cabvol wrote: »

to put this into perspective without being accused of spouting clap trap.:rolleyes:

It is a matter of fact whether people are a couple for benefit purposes, no one factor proves this, for example staying over/sexual relationship, shared children or living under the same roof, a combination of these with other factors for example how they appear in public, shared finances and the parties intentions would combine to show that the parties involved are a couple for benefit purposes. If a couples relationship has irretrievably (as far as can be known at the time) broken down and there is no intention to live together as couple in the future then yes they can claim as single people because that is what they are.

It is also possible for a former couple whose relationship has broken down to continue to live under the same roof but as separate households and claim benefits separately. (good luck in proving it though)

The often quoted staying over means you are in cohabitation is a myth. There is some very Grey areas in this and a lot of misinformation.

Marriage and civil relationship status obviously has some bearing on the above. Both parties in a marriage have a duty to maintain the other until the marriage is ended (CSA being an arrangement for the children) (a court order may provide further maintenance arrangements for spouses) the DWP may and often do pursue spouses for payments.

For your information CPAG books are not just for CAB 'experts':rolleyes: but are available to all individual claimants can get a very worth while discount as well. The book is normally £37.00 but for individuals it is available for £8.50. It is also normally available in larger reference libraries. CPAG is a guide to your rights but is not the law for this you will need to study the relevant legislation and case law (commissioners decisions) I would not bother though unless very bored.

I never said they were cab books I said I had free access to one.

The op is part of a couple so I really don't know you are bringing anything else in to this. So for them to live speperately and still have an relationship they are committing fraud. Afterall this is what we are doing advising the op!

If you read some of my previous posts you would have noticed I have already mentioned the above points you have made.

gingin_2

I thought this article was appropriate to add to the thread

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7861762.stm

Selfish adults 'damage childhood'


The aggressive pursuit of personal success by adults is now the greatest threat to British children, a major independent report on childhood says. It calls for a sea-change in social attitudes and policies to counter the damage done to children by society.

lolababy

The whole point is that you accused me of talking clap trap and not having a clue.
Your view point is a moral one and I think you should advise people of this.

alwaysonthego_2

lolababy wrote: »

The whole point is that you accused me of talking clap trap and not having a clue.
Your view point is a moral one and I think you should advise people of this.

Sorry but you are wrong! If a couple are still having a sexual relationship, they are spending lots of time together, have joint financial commitments, have children together, go on holiday etc etc they are still classed as a couple. I am advising the op on her situation. Every case is looked at indidvidually. If you condone the op claiming benefits whilst she is still part of a couple, that is your choice.

The lady doth protests too much, methinks.

seven-day-weekend

Instead of living apart and claiming single person's benefits when they are not single, (which IS FRAUD as alwaysonthego has said repeatedly), the couple should get their finances in order by first of all going over to the Debt Free Wannabee and Old Style boards, or if it is more serious than that, by contacting one of the free debt counselling services such as CAB or CCCS.

DaisyFlower

lisndai wrote: »

Does anyone actually do this and does it work ? I was talking with my husband about our finances which are in a bit of a mess at the moment and right or wrong i made a fleeting comment about how much better off we would be living apart for a few months this would easily clear and sort our finances out an awful lot quicker than we could living together .

There is one thing to live apart due to work commitments, stationed away etc - quite another to do it with the intent to gain from the benefit system which is simply fraud. Living in separate houses doesnt mean you aren't in a relationship still and, if caught, you'll be in an even worse financial situation.

Running two houses, paying maintenance etc may make it more expensive anyway.

Morally, marriage vows say for richer or poorer and I cant imagine telling the children their father is going to live elsewhere so that the state will pay more money. What a horrible thing to do to them purely for financial gain.