Accused of benefit fraud!!

lazer

To determine if a couple are living together as if married, the main question should be

If both people were working, and no one claiming benefits, would they be living together?

If the answer is no - then they should still be entitled to claim benefits

I have been with my boyfriend for around 7 years now, and at no time during that did i consider that were akin to a married couple. We do not live together, do not jointly account for money, however we do some of the things that could define us as a couple for the DWP.
Most weekends, we will generally be together either in his house or mine, and yes, we go shopping together, as saturday tends to be the only day either of us has time for shopping, we go on holidays together etc but each pay our own, we go out for meals together and most times only one of us will pay!

Neither of us are on benefits, and we are now engaged, but will not be living together until after we are married.

It is wrong that the DWP force people to basically live together when they are not ready. Its a big step to take, especailly when there are children involved.
How is it in the best interests of the children to move a boyfriend in after only 18 months, if the couple are not sure of their relationship yet?

drwho2011

uganda wrote: »

Look at my post number 29 - you may have good grounds for an appeal.

To be members of the same household means that

1. they live in the same house, flat, apartment, caravan or other dwelling place and neither normally lives in another household

1. [FONT=MPIAC O+ Helvetica,Helvetica][FONT=MPIAC O+ Helvetica,Helvetica]and [/FONT][/FONT]
2. they both live there regularly, apart from absences necessary for employment, to visit relatives, etc.

From #1 the OP's boyfriend is renting a room which he uses only for sleeping sometimes. It would be hard to argue that he actually lives there.

This also opens up the argument that he is renting a room so that she retains as many lone benefits as possible but is in a position whereby he indirectly benefits from them.

From #2 it would appear they live together except for employment or when he visits his children. (This the OP has already stated)

Personally I don't think an appeal based on what has already been stated will stand much chance.

In meantime though OP will need to find out someway of supporting herself while she has no benefits, her boyfriend has already said he will do what he can to help so surely that is further evidence that they are in a mutually supportive relationship.

Could you imagine the next compliance interview.

Compliance: So how did you support yourselves while your benefits were stopped?
OP: My partner.......er boyfriend helped me out.

mich2201

[QUOTE.
Could you imagine the next compliance interview.

Compliance: So how did you support yourselves while your benefits were stopped?
OP: My partner.......er boyfriend helped me out.[/QUOTE]

I never said he would help me out in a financial capacity. I have already said he is not in a position to.

lazer

mich2201 wrote: »

[QUOTE.
Could you imagine the next compliance interview.

Compliance: So how did you support yourselves while your benefits were stopped?
OP: My partner.......er boyfriend helped me out.

I never said he would help me out in a financial capacity. I have already said he is not in a position to.[/QUOTE]

Since the DWP has now decided (in my view incorrectly) that you are a couple, look into what benefits you could then get

You may find you get more than you would think - child tax credits etc

Also - have a read at this
http://static.advicenow.org.uk/files/benefits-and-livingtogether-2010-11-1161.pdf

drwho2011

mich2201 wrote: »

[QUOTE.
I never said he would help me out in a financial capacity. I have already said he is not in a position to.

Which begs the question how then would he help you out?

What I don't understand is if he is renting a room for £400 a month with all bills included which he doesn't stay at much, lives at yours and doesn't contribute financially is he not the position to support you?

There has to be more to this story.

mich2201

drwho2011 wrote: »

Which begs the question how then would he help you out?

What I don't understand is if he is renting a room for £400 a month with all bills included which he doesn't stay at much, lives at yours and doesn't contribute financially is he not the position to support you?

There has to be more to this story.

I meant he would help me by providing proof of his circumstances.
Also, he rents a room which he is in around 5 nights a week , you cant really say he doesnt stay there much. And he does not live at mine .

drwho2011

mich2201 wrote: »

I meant he would help me by providing proof of his circumstances.
Also, he rents a room which he is in around 5 nights a week , you cant really say he doesnt stay there much. And he does not live at mine .

It wouldn't matter if he never stayed the night, you could still be considered partners.

debrag

drwho2011 wrote: »

Which begs the question how then would he help you out?

What I don't understand is if he is renting a room for £400 a month with all bills included which he doesn't stay at much, lives at yours and doesn't contribute financially is he not the position to support you?

There has to be more to this story.

Exactly. Maybe he's more for saving for a house rather than helping out his girlfriend.

Does he have children he is paying maintance for? I can't remember.

debrag

mich2201 wrote: »

I meant he would help me by providing proof of his circumstances.
Also, he rents a room which he is in around 5 nights a week , you cant really say he doesnt stay there much. And he does not live at mine .

hours in a week = 168
working hours = 37.5
traveling to work = 5
sleeping hours @ own place = 30 (6 hours a night - 6am to 12pm)
sleeping hours @ your place = 12 (6 hours a night)

So out of 168 hrs he spends 30 of those at his own place, 37.5 at work + traveling of 5, which means 95.5 hours with you., which is over 50%. This of course depends on his hours of work and how long he sleeps etc.

he basically only spends his sleeping hours at his.

Sorry I was bored.

FBaby

Uganda i understand you know the rules welll so know what you are talking about but in that case i think it is really sad the rules are so lax and no surprise they are so many making the best of benefits. what incentive would there be for this couple to officially move in together if she can claim £100s a week in benefits with the cost only be for him to pay £400 a month all bills included? They might as well stay like this forever.... or as is often the case until the single mum isnt entitled to benefits any longer. Let's be realistic finances do play a key part for most couples when deciding to offially move in together.

single mums are entitled to benefits because it is accepted their single status makes it harder for them to find employment to support their family. In the case of OP if her partner isnt prepared to support her and her kids maybe he could do so much in helping with childcare allowing her to get a job.