Jsa and living seperatly

alwaysonthego_2

Bogof_Babe wrote: »

But even if it's morally wrong, what other solution is there? As I've already said, I don't know what they are expected to do in this set of circs.

They should split up!

The op gave the impression that she wanted to move out so they could claim more benefits.

terryw

alwaysonthego wrote: »

Actually yes they do look at a financial relationship but there is other criteria too! Many married couples have seperate finances.

Maybe governmental departments won't check the couple's situation, but if they are reported then what? As Nasa says it is morally wrong!

If the guy is living at a separate address to which he contributes financially then everything else being equal, it does not matter if any government body investigates. He can go to the girlfriend's dwelling for some nights, they can have sex and volunteer this information to the authorities but will not be asked, they can go on days out together etc etc. This is just normal living and someone claiming from the state is entitled to do this just like any other citizen. Even if they choose to separate for financial reasons, I fear that the rules are to blame not the people who do it!

It may be morally wrong (and I concur here) but what rules would you suggest in its place? If a couple have lived together then for the rest of eternity, the person in work should maintain the person out of work when they live at separate addresses is draconian and unworkable.

There are millions of couples who live at separate addresses because of the financial advantages. I wish that there was an easy answer to the problem.

terryw

alwaysonthego wrote: »

They should split up!

The op gave the impression that she wanted to move out so they could claim more benefits.

Not at all. The Op has stated quite clearly that the splitting up is so that the boyfriend can claim JSA. They get no benefits at all at present.

mealone

terryw wrote: »

Not at all. The Op has stated quite clearly that the splitting up is so that the boyfriend can claim JSA. They get no benefits at all at present.

Thats what always said, he is going to move out to claim a benefit to which while living together hes not entitled to but seperated he is, thats clearly splitting up to claim benefits fraudulently.

pipkin71

mealone wrote: »

Thats what always said, he is going to move out to claim a benefit to which while living together hes not entitled to but seperated he is, thats clearly splitting up to claim benefits fraudulently.

Having read the OP's posts mealone, I have to disagree.

I can see the idea of a separation has been bought about due to financial matters, but I also get the idea that a feeling of resentment is building up within the OP, as she is paying for all things and BF wasn't paying much even when he had a part time job.

If the only way to try to save their relationship is through living separately, I really don't see this as fraud, because how can you continue to live happily together whilst resenting the person you are living with?

I would think differently if they were continuing to live together whilst claiming that the boyfriend lived somewhere else.

terryw

mealone wrote: »

Thats what always said, he is going to move out to claim a benefit to which while living together hes not entitled to but seperated he is, thats clearly splitting up to claim benefits fraudulently.

Sorry but we disagree. He is moving out of the shared accommodation so he can claim benefits. Full stop. He is not doing this to claim fraudulently. He is going to live at his mum's. He presumably will have to pay his mum out of the JSA and the mum's council tax and benefits (if applicable) will be affected. There is no suggestion that this is not a real move and that he will continue to live secretly with the OP. They are not going to be living as husband and wife (to use the official jargon) with the OP so there is no question of any fraud. .

alwaysonthego_2

pipkin71 wrote: »

I would think differently if they were continuing to live together whilst claiming that the boyfriend lived somewhere else.

That's usually the case bf moves back in with parents but still spends majority of his time with his gf.

What about married couples who live seperately to save their marriage, should they get extra benefits?

The op should get advice from welfare rights worker at the CAB as they will have a copy of the CPAG as info is not available on the Netadviser.

PasturesNew

An alternative is to look at cheaper places to live, which would have lower rent, lower CT and lower insurance/heating bills.

Quite often couples live in places they couldn't afford as a single person, or on a single income. e.g. 2-bed places.

pipkin71

alwaysonthego wrote: »

That's usually the case bf moves back in with parents but still spends majority of his time with his gf.

What about married couples who live seperately to save their marriage, should they get extra benefits?

The op should get advice from welfare rights worker at the CAB as they will have a copy of the CPAG as info is not available on the Netadviser.

Married couples have spilt up and been entitled to claim benefits, as they are no longer living as husband and wife. The problem arises if they are still living together as they were when their names were at the same address, and if the only difference is that the name has moved address, then it's fraud, but as this appears [from what has been posted] to be more than just moving the boyfriend's name to a new location, I personally do not see it as such.

Ultimately it would be down to an investigating officer to determine whether or not they could be see as LTAHW, should an investigation be necessary, rather than people on a forum who have different opinions, but I totally agree that the OP should seek advice.

terryw

ceridwen wrote: »

I would <SNIPPED ONLY FOR BREVITY>

sh.

What a smashing post! Please stand for election.