|
|
Post by george1947 on Oct 20, 2015 13:06:32 GMT 7
Last May I had to be in Australia for a civil court case (Will dispute, I lost the case). While there I approached a Centrelink office and asked if I took a Filipina partner without assets or income would I stay on my single age pension rate. I was given a Mod-P form, and assured that I would continue on single rate, however, yesterday I received a letter from Sydney telling me I am now on partnered rate.
I plan to phone Sydney in a day or two, and ask for a review, and maybe appeal.
If I'm forced to, I will have to separate from my partner to get my pension back. I can't live on partnered rate, when my partner does not have any income.
This is a woman who has never been to Australia, and never will be in Australia.
Please advise me on what to do.
Regards...George
|
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Oct 20, 2015 14:46:44 GMT 7
|
|
|
|
Post by george1947 on Oct 20, 2015 16:56:30 GMT 7
Thanks, Banjo. That's terrific news. I just spent the last 45 minutes carefully reading the link you so kindly provided for me, and made some notes for when I phone tomorrow morning.
I suffer from considerable hearing loss, but I have a hands free phone that I can usually hear on. I frequently rely on my Filipina partner to be my ears. She has good English, and is a widow of 20 years. her late husband was a police officer, shot to death while on duty.
Regards...George
|
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Oct 20, 2015 17:59:06 GMT 7
Good luck George, there's a couple of guys here that have more experience than me in this field so keep an eye on the forum in case they comment.
Congratulations on your honesty and keep us informed of the outcome.
|
|
|
|
Post by latindancer on Oct 21, 2015 15:48:11 GMT 7
Hi George,
If your partner genuinely has no income and virtually no assets (apart from really basic stuff) I can foresee no real problem in your getting a Section 24 exemption from being regarded as a couple. Only real problem is that you may have to make a formal statement to that effect.
If she has a small income of any sort, that will create problems, in that you will have to explain all details. And it's best to be honest, as they could always check up.
The reason you are paid less is that you are deemed to be in a position to pool your resources with a partner....rent, food, washing etc etc.
First step is to ask for a review of the decision to pay you as one of a couple. If that decision is reversed, good. If it goes to the next step of the process, that is a bit of a pain in the neck.
|
|
|
|
Post by george1947 on Nov 5, 2015 17:41:41 GMT 7
I spoke to the Sydney office by phone, and was told I am not exempt. My partner receives $75 per month as a gift from her sister, working in the Middle East.
I'm not paying any rent. My partner owns the house we live in. In Australian dollars the house is only worth $15,000, but it may mean "pooling of resources".
My stepdaughter works in a shopping mall, selling French fries. She works from 8:00 AM until 8:00 PM, 6 days a week for $90/month. That money is hers alone, and was not declared to Centrelink. The stepdaughter eats the food I buy. She carries a meal to work each for lunch.
I submitted additional information, including bank records. This may take another 2 to 3 weeks to finalise.
Food in this part of the Philippines is virtually given away, and this tends to make my case for "financial hardship" rather difficult to justify. The low cost of living also came out in the judge's decision.
It seems that Centrelink staff are instructed to give walk-in customers information that is in the interest of the government, and not what is true. If I had been told the truth I would not be in this position now. It's just that several people know of our arrangement, and I was afraid someone would report, which would have been far worse for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Nov 6, 2015 7:19:03 GMT 7
Hopefully commonsense will prevail George, you may like to call Welfare Rights in your former home state and run it past them.
There's certainly some degree of resentment among Centrelink staff regarding portability of the DSP.
|
|
|
|
Post by george1947 on Nov 6, 2015 11:32:21 GMT 7
Thanks for the words of encouragement, Banjo. I'm on the Age Pension, and not DSP, but many problems are the same. I qualified to leave Australia under the 25 year rule. If the new 35 rule is worked out in months, rather than whole years, then I would have a total of 36 years, but if only full years are counted I would have 34, should I ever have to go back for six months, or more.
I'm still awaiting the official decision. I only discovered the official ss351-1507en "Revue of a Decision" form yesterday, and emailed that, together with all supporting documents, last night. I don't know what Centrelink's time frame is, but I expect to have to wait at least another two weeks for an answer.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Nov 6, 2015 13:28:52 GMT 7
Mate. 34 years is acceptable, a loss of around $8-10 per fortnight.
You have unlimited portability, now you focus on the single rate.
Next step. You get rid of that $75/month remittance, maybe it can go under another name. The next thing I would do is go to a notary public and have a Legal Separation drawn up. If they force you, you will have to invoke that and maybe you can submit another address for you or her.
|
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Nov 6, 2015 19:07:41 GMT 7
Hard to hide it once he's let them know, they not going to believe she's giving it up.
Makes no difference where it goes, they have no way of checking overseas.
|
|
|
|
Post by immiadvice on Nov 8, 2015 23:22:20 GMT 7
Hard to hide it once he's let them know, they not going to believe she's giving it up. Makes no difference where it goes, they have no way of checking overseas. Don't believe that. They will and do regularly employ private investigators overseas. |
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Nov 9, 2015 7:10:39 GMT 7
I'd need to see some sort of proof other than hearsay from the paranoid.
|
|
|
|
Post by Denis-NFA on Nov 9, 2015 10:12:11 GMT 7
I'd need to see some sort of proof other than hearsay from the paranoid. What, so now your prejudiced against the paranoid...  But the bloke across the road keeps his eye on me, and the neighbour 2 doors down does as well. Let alone the old bloke next door. And I keep my eye out for them. We have had some type of 'flu' go through the village here. Knocks the old folk around, including me. |
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Nov 9, 2015 11:00:09 GMT 7
I'd be watching you if you were my neighbour as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Denis-NFA on Nov 9, 2015 13:21:17 GMT 7
I'd be watching you if you were my neighbour as well. Burst out laughing. Thank you. |
|
