|
Post by latindancer on May 18, 2012 15:19:18 GMT 7
Well, he is recognized as one of their resident "DSP overseas" experts. And although he claims to not have any kind of discretionary power, he DOES.
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on May 18, 2012 16:15:49 GMT 7
Well, he is recognized as one of their resident "DSP overseas" experts. And although he claims to not have any kind of discretionary power, he DOES. For sure, if nofixedaddress wants to talk to him I'll send the name and phone number by PM. I've made a policy here that no Centrelink officers will be named on the open forum unless they have been named in the media anyway. And that includes initials Lynne.... ;D
|
|
|
Post by Denis-NFA on May 20, 2012 10:32:02 GMT 7
Arrived back from Darwin yesterday. My head is still reeling. I'm finding it difficult to comprehend it all.
Prior to leaving in November last year I spoke with C/L International many times and I told them what I was going to do, checked the procedures to comply with C/L requirements and determined I was good to go. They even advised to make sure an application for portability not be made straight up in July 2012 but leave it go for a month. So my returns were February, May just done and August.
In February there was no mention of residency.
So now in May I was determined to be non-resident plus they made me fill out a partner form for my lady and my next payment on Friday (thank G-d I get one) is at the couple rate including the pension supplement.
They gave me 2 options, being they would let me return for 2 weeks to 'wind up my affairs' with no loss OR I can go return and go down the appeals track with the threat that if I am unsuccessful my DSP will be cut, I will have to be on NewStart for 2 years prior to being eligible to apply for the DSP again.
In my stunned state I said well you are declaring me homeless and are they going to pay for my return as my August flight is a jetstar no-frills and I am locked in. Not their concern of course.
The whole process feels like an entrapment exercise by C/L.
I was finally given a telephone number that I can ring C/L International from here prior to leaving for Darwin and that's good but it is bloody difficult when you are profoundly deaf.
I also said that if you are going to declare my lady a partner then you should be aware that she has a child who is a dependent but I don't know if that has any effect on payments.
Thanks again for your support and All the Best to All of You.
|
|
|
Post by spaceyone on May 20, 2012 11:09:28 GMT 7
I also said that if you are going to declare my lady a partner then you should be aware that she has a child who is a dependent but I don't know if that has any effect on payments. Thanks again for your support and All the Best to All of You. Wow! Yes, Hank runs Centrelink like any terrorist organisation these days - restricting people's travel, creating disruption and causing people to tremble with fear. YES, make sure they are aware that you both have another mouth to feed. It can only drive your payments up, and you will need all you can get trying to survive in Australia these days. You should also apply for social housing. It is like housing commission, except they put you in a private rental place, and subsidise your rent according to your income. It still has a waiting list of over 6 months, but is not like the decades you wait for the other. You can also be advanced up that list, if you have severe medical issues. Having the child, will make them think a bit more about helping you with housing. If you were single, they wouldn't give a rats.
|
|
|
Post by Denis-NFA on May 20, 2012 11:34:31 GMT 7
Thanks spaceyone.
My mind, which struggles at the best of times to make sense of the world, is just sludge since last Wednesday.
What did happen to the whole portability change that was going to be introduced 1/7/2012?
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on May 20, 2012 12:03:37 GMT 7
It's still coming nfa, just hang on and hope for the best, if it's done properly our next trips away will involve coming back to Australia at OUR convenience, not Centrelink's.
|
|
|
Post by peter on May 21, 2012 1:30:44 GMT 7
Concerning the case of NFA one needs to understand the definition of Social Security Residency which is not clear to me.
I am reluctant to ask a question concerning residency as it is such a messy topic, but until the definition of Centrelink Residency is cleared up, then one will never understand how and why Centrelink makes rulings on DSP payments.
My understanding is;
1. Under the present rules for DSP payments, Social Security Residency is "an absence no longer than 13 weeks " once DSP is approved.
2. This will become six weeks under the proposed changes.
3. If one is abroad longer than 13 weeks at present then the DSP ceases, and one is a non resident for Social Security purposes, and one must return to Australia to reapply.
4. After six months absence one is a "non resident " for pension supplement purposes, but one is still a Social Security Resident for DSP purposes if one has not exceeded the 13 weeks offshore rule limit.
5. DSP is paid at two rates either the single or partnered. The fact that one gets married whilst overseas on DSP will reduce the single rate to the partner rate but marriage itself should have no effect upon one"s Social Security Residency is one is compliant with the 13 week rule.
If points 1 to 5 above are correct, then I do not understand, how NFA could have his Social Security Residency cancelled.
From the point of view of domicility, one is resident wherever one sets up a household with the view of living in that house and with a wife therein, the more so as time goes by and the longer one lives there. A few days absence a year cannot over ride the fact of the domicile.
But Australian Social Security law has a definition of Social Security Residency for DSP of "an absence no longer than 13 weeks" which is a legal definition made up for their legislation.
So in the case of NFA, I do not understand how Centrelink can stop the DSP since he is compliant with the 13 week rule but I suspect that it has something to do with a marriage situation changing the residency situation.
And if so, I do not understand how that can be done since the law is based upon the Social Security definition of residency which is not domicility.
The situation reverses when former foreign residents return and have to prove residency which is always proof of domicility.
Any comments?
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on May 21, 2012 7:24:10 GMT 7
Your first points confuse residency with portability, the 13 week and 6 week periods are portability periods. Overstaying these periods involve the stoppage of payments, the 13 week portability allows you to remain overseas for another 13 weeks unpaid, the 6 week period is yet to be determined. If you stay past these points then you have the DSP cut off, presumably on residency grounds but also for breach of the portability period.
The new legislation 1/1/12 changes the residency requirements to place greater emphasis on the amount of travel one does rather than the connection you have to Australia. I still think the law is flaky, it should say in black and white how much time a pensioner can send out of the country before his residency becomes threatened, but once again Centrelink are allowed to interpret the law and make their own rules. This has not been successful in the past, as the number of successful appeals show, and I cannot see why it should be now.
This is my own opinion, we don't give advice here, we discuss things and lend support, everything else is what we think personally.
|
|
|
Post by rowdy on May 21, 2012 12:43:52 GMT 7
Concerning the case of NFA one needs to understand the definition of Social Security Residency which is not clear to me. I am reluctant to ask a question concerning residency as it is such a messy topic, but until the definition of Centrelink Residency is cleared up, then one will never understand how and why Centrelink makes rulings on DSP payments. My understanding is; 1. Under the present rules for DSP payments, Social Security Residency is "an absence no longer than 13 weeks " once DSP is approved. 2. This will become six weeks under the proposed changes. 3. If one is abroad longer than 13 weeks at present then the DSP ceases, and one is a non resident for Social Security purposes, and one must return to Australia to reapply. 4. After six months absence one is a "non resident " for pension supplement purposes, but one is still a Social Security Resident for DSP purposes if one has not exceeded the 13 weeks offshore rule limit. 5. DSP is paid at two rates either the single or partnered. The fact that one gets married whilst overseas on DSP will reduce the single rate to the partner rate but marriage itself should have no effect upon one"s Social Security Residency is one is compliant with the 13 week rule. If points 1 to 5 above are correct, then I do not understand, how NFA could have his Social Security Residency cancelled. From the point of view of domicility, one is resident wherever one sets up a household with the view of living in that house and with a wife therein, the more so as time goes by and the longer one lives there. A few days absence a year cannot over ride the fact of the domicile. But Australian Social Security law has a definition of Social Security Residency for DSP of "an absence no longer than 13 weeks" which is a legal definition made up for their legislation. So in the case of NFA, I do not understand how Centrelink can stop the DSP since he is compliant with the 13 week rule but I suspect that it has something to do with a marriage situation changing the residency situation. And if so, I do not understand how that can be done since the law is based upon the Social Security definition of residency which is not domicility. The situation reverses when former foreign residents return and have to prove residency which is always proof of domicility. Any comments? Portability and Residency are two different things. If you don't comply with the portability requirements (currently 13 weeks for DSP) you will have your pension cut off for non-compliance. This really has nothing to do with residency. It is a requirement however to receive and continue to receive the DSP that one must be a resident. Look at section 7(3) of the SSAct for the definition of residency for social security purposes. Even though someone may comply with the portability requirements they can still be cut off if Centrelink deems them to be a non-resident. Just as has happened to some on this forum.
|
|
|
Post by latindancer on May 21, 2012 15:49:06 GMT 7
Yeah....ME. It seems that neither out government nor Centrelink hold marriage to be anything like sacred. I got married overseas on September 21 and foolishly reported it. Immediately my payment was reduced by $120/week (30%), and I was told I would no longer be paid after January 1. I returned to try and get work but was given the royal run-around by incompetent bureaucrats. It took about 10 weeks for me to get registered with a Disability Job Agency. It's all in my previous posts. Apologies to those here who may be tired of hearing about this, but that's my ongoing life. Currently receiving single rate though.
|
|
|
Post by Denis-NFA on May 22, 2012 14:12:41 GMT 7
I finally found out today when I rang C/L International how my 2010 impairment rating and job capacity rating was assessed.
30 points, on one condition out of 3, and 8 to 14 hours work capacity (lucky me)! They ignored my other 2 conditions at that time.
Now that I have had time to settle down from last weeks sandbagging I have requested papers for protest of being called a partner (SSact24) and am picking up on SSact7(3) residency as outlined by another member of this forum.
Have not heard from him yet but am requesting a pointer to a solicitor who 'knows' the social security act to assist me.
am going to lodge a complaint with the HRC because despite my repeated requests to put in writing what the c/l person was saying it was all verbal, and i said i cannot understand what you are saying.
If Banjo has a spare orange robe i will appreciate.
its a fun life
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on May 22, 2012 14:35:22 GMT 7
If you come across a solicitor who knows the Social Security Act let me know. Mate, this new portability was meant for all of us, every DSP recipient who will never get a proper job was intended to be able to travel as they pleased. Now, rumors of rules and points and interference as Centrelink snakes it's tentacles into our lives again. This time we are 110% right, as opposed to the former 100%, this law was made specifically for us, and by the Lord Buddha, we will hold them to it.
|
|
|
Post by Denis-NFA on May 22, 2012 16:12:15 GMT 7
I told them in Darwin I want the key to the door so I can camp inside their office.
Failing that, LOL, I will have to go back shortly and I will be setting up a DSPoverseas Embassy on their front door.
They wanted to get me a Soc(puppet) Worker. I was actually proud of myself for not smacking the person in the face. Even shook her hand.
Saddest part of the previous is that I can defend other people but I am hopeless to defend myself on the spot. Takes me days to work it all out for me.
And Banjo, I do not know if this solicitor knows someone but I told him that there are potentially other people who will come behind my challenge.
We will see.
They tell me I will get paid on Friday, after that who knows.
I have said to Phil people I will take over the Phils.
Maybe I should take up the previous offer of the Skipper on this thread and sail a boat to Australia.
|
|
|
Post by Denis-NFA on May 22, 2012 16:23:38 GMT 7
And please forgive me if I do not acknowledge any person for their contribution by your handle.
But I have learnt stuff I would have never known without your contribution. I appreciate.
Funniest thing for me today was to learn that they attributed 30 points on the 2010 scale to me for my deafness.
Hah. It means they have not even begun to asses me on the mental scale stuff and that is the basis I am going to approach the HRC because, fair dinkum, it takes me a while to work things out. I can do it but it takes a while. Thats all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2012 8:18:12 GMT 7
And please forgive me if I do not acknowledge any person for their contribution by your handle. But I have learnt stuff I would have never known without your contribution. I appreciate. Funniest thing for me today was to learn that they attributed 30 points on the 2010 scale to me for my deafness. Hah. It means they have not even begun to asses me on the mental scale stuff and that is the basis I am going to approach the HRC because, fair dinkum, it takes me a while to work things out. I can do it but it takes a while. Thats all. I have been on a while and still learning
|
|