Widows pension and co-habitating

mojos.revenge

atush wrote: »

I am not accusing them of fraud, just pointing out the possibility as a warning to how the set themselves up. If you pass on the relelvant details, or contact CAB for them to bone up on the particulars, it is up to them and their conscience.

Personally, I got the impression that they ARen't a couple, and therefore she should keep her widows pension. I just wanted you to know a few problems that could creep up.

Blaming us for answering, is just silly.

It wasn't actually your comment that I was talking about. Considering that I am only asking for someone else I obviously cannot answer some of the questions that I have been asked.
I can only say, that, from what I know of the situation I too think that her pension should be safe, again if it were me I would continue to claim and say nothing, especially as her intention is to provide him with somewhere to live, to me it seems foolish to put the idea in the officials heads, especially as there is no case to answer. However, she wanted to know, and I asked the question. Thanks for your help.

Mojisola

mojos.revenge wrote: »

if it were me I would continue to claim and say nothing, especially as her intention is to provide him with somewhere to live, to me it seems foolish to put the idea in the officials heads, especially as there is no case to answer. [/FONT][/B][/I]

If she's claiming the single person discount on her council tax, she'll have to let the council know that someone else is living at the house and start paying the full amount.

trollopscarletwoman

Dunroamin wrote: »

Having come back to this thread after a gap, I have to say that some of the suggestions are getting pretty close to benefit fraud. ?

Either it is fraud or it isn't.

Can't be both.

atush

They aren't benefit fraud if the pair aren't a couple. If they share a house or are owner and lodger.

Freecall

trollopscarletwoman wrote: »

Either it is fraud or it isn't.

A philosopher amongst us I see.

dzug1

trollopscarletwoman wrote: »

Either it is fraud or it isn't.

Can't be both.

But determining which it is is non-trivial and depends on how officialdom perceives alleged 'facts' and whether their perception is 'right'

System

Presumably if there were some legal impediment to a couple being married or living as a couple (eg being brother and sister, or father and daughter or some other prohibited consanquinity) then no one would presume to ask the question.
Or does a pension provider or a benefits agency assume illegality exists unless proved otherwise?

bigadaj

Clifford_Pope wrote: »

Presumably if there were some legal impediment to a couple being married or living as a couple (eg being brother and sister, or father and daughter or some other prohibited consanquinity) then no one would presume to ask the question.
Or does a pension provider or a benefits agency assume illegality exists unless proved otherwise?

Depends whether you're Norman tebbitt and think you can marry your son to avoid inheritance tax.