|
Post by Banker on Nov 24, 2011 16:26:54 GMT 7
Thanks for sharing that with us Rod.
|
|
|
Post by latindancer on Nov 24, 2011 16:42:44 GMT 7
A picture is beginning to form though, and it seems like the honest will be the ones to be penalised. Like me ! As of Monday this week, my DSP was reduced by 30%, simply because I am now married, and honestly reported this. Never mind that I am overseas, now married to a lady who makes only AUD$90 per week. Centrelink have taken away more from my pension than my wife earns. From over $800 per fortnight, down to $564. That's a 30 % reduction. Unbelievable. And still waiting for an explanation of their rationale....as well as one payment "missing" completely. I believe they have a charter, too.....ensuring a certain standard of service. What a sick joke. What does it take to get their attention ? Self-immolation ?
|
|
|
Post by rowdy on Nov 24, 2011 17:12:22 GMT 7
..Hi all. Just got off the blower from my telephone interview fron International Services. All straight forward but no joy either. I'm afraid the result is as expected. Below is a brief summary of the 19 minute interview which really touched on two points only ie 'residency' and 'intent'. I asked many questions as well and received more or less the same reply. One point which is worthy to note is when I raised the topic of Macklin's Media Release re proposed changes to the Act in July 2012 ie 'indefinite portability'..i was told it was a proposal only and had not been before the parliamment as yet, and the indefinite portability would apply to persons with a 'serious disabilty and no prospect of work in the future'. (So those of us with a permanent disability are not considered). So I will be returning in March 2012 and will have to provide 'proof' I am intending to leave here and provide 'proof' I am staying in Australia. As you will read, we are still allowed to travel out of Australia up to13 weeks but will be monitored and probably reviewed if we do. Regards. ROD. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- INTERVIEW – Phone November 24th. Not word for word as the interview lasted 19+ minutes. As arranged I received my call from Centrelink International Services and a short interview was conducted based solely on two points, my ‘residency’ and ‘intention’ to return. They stated I did not fulfill the residency rules in that since 2006 I have spent more time out of Australia than in it and therefore are deemed to be not a resident of Australia. (When I referred to their definition of ‘residency’ they stated that the definition could only be applied IF I had spent an equal amount of time in Australia and where I am at present). They then asked me about my ‘intention’ to return to Australia. I said because I no longer was deemed a resident I intended returning in March 2012 before my next 13 week period expires. They said ok but I would have to provide proof of my permanency back in Australia ie rental agreement, statement from family member etc. I would also have to provide proof I had left the country I am in by showing a termination of lease or similar and the closing of the bank account I have. I asked if I could travel overseas once back in Australia and was told yes I could travel up to 13 weeks away from Australia….’Excuse me’ I said..am I not already doing that? They said that is the rule, however, if you do stay out of Australia for a greater part of the year than back in you will be cut?... I said so if I travel out for a month at a time, a few times a year that will be ok as long as I do not exceed 26 weeks in any one year?..They said that’s ok but if you start to make a pattern of it they will look at you. I said, so at age 65 I can when I am eligible for OA pension I can leave again permanently..they said sure, but it would be advisable for you to stay until then..it’s only a couple of years’. I said I hope all the other guys are happy with their interviews ..they said, ‘No they’re not’. Interview terminated. Rod, You stated: - "When I referred to their definition of ‘residency’ they stated that the definition could only be applied IF I had spent an equal amount of time in Australia and where I am at present".I would have reminded these goons that in fact section 7 of the SSAct defines 'residency' and therefore their interpretation is inconsistent with that of the SSAct. Nowhere does it say you have to spend more time in Australia than you do outside - that is total BS. If the legislature intended that to be the test for residency then it would have been provided in the legislation.
|
|
|
Post by blacktulipvampire on Nov 24, 2011 17:24:30 GMT 7
Thanks Rod.
|
|
|
Post by rodcourt49 on Nov 24, 2011 17:47:34 GMT 7
Rod thanks for sharing. A few things stand out. Firstly C/L make up the rules as they go along without clear guidlines. If there is a 6 month law in place then it should be stated clearly or have I missed something? I dont see where its written. Also it appears as a previous poster (jesus) mentioned that leasing a property in OZ seems to be the preferred method of strengthening residency (as mentioned in your interview) I cant see a reason for you not start the 13 week hop again once you have re affirmed your residency in Oz and Centrelink okays it, until the next time they question you and you reaffirm your residency, rinse n repeat again. Whats the difference between serious and permanent disability? ..here is Centrelinks definition of Disabiity Support Pension..there is no mention in their list of definitions of the words 'serious' or 'permanent' disability, as follows. Disability Support Pension: Payment to persons 16 years or older where their disability, illness or injury has been assessed as preventing them from working for at least two years. A person assessed as permanently blind may also be eligible for Disability Support Pension. ..it appears to their own colloquialism..whereas Jenny Macklin's Media Release of October 5, refers to 'permanent' with no reference to 'serious' as follows- New, more generous rules from 1 July 2012, will allow people receiving DSP who have a permanent disability and no future work capacity, to travel overseas for more than 13 weeks while retaining access to their pension. ..one again in-house application, and not necessarily correct! I may start the 13 week journey again, will see.
|
|
|
Post by rodcourt49 on Nov 24, 2011 17:52:57 GMT 7
..Hi all. Just got off the blower from my telephone interview fron International Services. All straight forward but no joy either. I'm afraid the result is as expected. Below is a brief summary of the 19 minute interview which really touched on two points only ie 'residency' and 'intent'. I asked many questions as well and received more or less the same reply. One point which is worthy to note is when I raised the topic of Macklin's Media Release re proposed changes to the Act in July 2012 ie 'indefinite portability'..i was told it was a proposal only and had not been before the parliamment as yet, and the indefinite portability would apply to persons with a 'serious disabilty and no prospect of work in the future'. (So those of us with a permanent disability are not considered). So I will be returning in March 2012 and will have to provide 'proof' I am intending to leave here and provide 'proof' I am staying in Australia. As you will read, we are still allowed to travel out of Australia up to13 weeks but will be monitored and probably reviewed if we do. Regards. ROD. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- INTERVIEW – Phone November 24th. Not word for word as the interview lasted 19+ minutes. As arranged I received my call from Centrelink International Services and a short interview was conducted based solely on two points, my ‘residency’ and ‘intention’ to return. They stated I did not fulfill the residency rules in that since 2006 I have spent more time out of Australia than in it and therefore are deemed to be not a resident of Australia. (When I referred to their definition of ‘residency’ they stated that the definition could only be applied IF I had spent an equal amount of time in Australia and where I am at present). They then asked me about my ‘intention’ to return to Australia. I said because I no longer was deemed a resident I intended returning in March 2012 before my next 13 week period expires. They said ok but I would have to provide proof of my permanency back in Australia ie rental agreement, statement from family member etc. I would also have to provide proof I had left the country I am in by showing a termination of lease or similar and the closing of the bank account I have. I asked if I could travel overseas once back in Australia and was told yes I could travel up to 13 weeks away from Australia….’Excuse me’ I said..am I not already doing that? They said that is the rule, however, if you do stay out of Australia for a greater part of the year than back in you will be cut?... I said so if I travel out for a month at a time, a few times a year that will be ok as long as I do not exceed 26 weeks in any one year?..They said that’s ok but if you start to make a pattern of it they will look at you. I said, so at age 65 I can when I am eligible for OA pension I can leave again permanently..they said sure, but it would be advisable for you to stay until then..it’s only a couple of years’. I said I hope all the other guys are happy with their interviews ..they said, ‘No they’re not’. Interview terminated. Rod, You stated: - "When I referred to their definition of ‘residency’ they stated that the definition could only be applied IF I had spent an equal amount of time in Australia and where I am at present".I would have reminded these goons that in fact section 7 of the SSAct defines 'residency' and therefore their interpretation is inconsistent with that of the SSAct. Nowhere does it say you have to spend more time in Australia than you do outside - that is total BS. If the legislature intended that to be the test for residency then it would have been provided in the legislation. ..i did remind them and quoted it to them from the Act and their own Terms and Definitions as follows- Residence: A person’s usual place of living, i.e. their house, home unit, flat, caravan, etc. It may also refer to the state of residing in a country, that is, the usual country of residence. A person can still be resident in a country although they may be temporarily out of that country. ..when i pointed out the last sentence and said that is me..I am temporarily out of Australia and allowed to do so..she said that would be true if you are spending an equal amount of time in Australia and out of Australia, however since 2006 I have been out more than i have bee in, so i have created a pattern they see as my intent was to reside out of Australia, therefore i was no longer considered a resident.
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Nov 24, 2011 18:12:59 GMT 7
I got that when i was interviewed, I was even told "you can't possibly call yourself a resident, can you?".
It will make no difference to me, if I feel like staying in Australia I will, if I don't I'll fly out. If they cut me off I'll go back and fight it.
|
|
|
Post by zorro1 on Nov 24, 2011 21:12:07 GMT 7
I got that when i was interviewed, I was even told "you can't possibly call yourself a resident, can you?". It will make no difference to me, if I feel like staying in Australia I will, if I don't I'll fly out. If they cut me off I'll go back and fight it. that about sums it up
|
|
|
Post by Banker on Nov 25, 2011 6:04:57 GMT 7
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2011 7:20:47 GMT 7
Rod That was very interesting. It will be interesting to see what develops next year. Centrelink have different ideas as to the interpretation on the Act.
|
|
|
Post by rodcourt49 on Nov 25, 2011 8:15:24 GMT 7
..it was a done deal before they even dialled my number..no matter what i said they kept referring to their interpretation of 'residency'..they gave little weight to the Minister's Media Release alsmost as if it was just it was just say-so and would not eventuate...i have no idea where they got 'serious disability' from when the Media Release clearly states 'permanent'. Have to wait for Parliament to sit in the New Year for that to be clarified. I sincerely hope you other DSPers fare better than me, particularly those of you with wives ad children! Take care. ROD.
|
|
|
Post by zorro1 on Nov 25, 2011 13:03:27 GMT 7
Well okay so what we know for sure is C/L is cracking down with their own version of residency as was predicted by some. It matters not that when we were able to work and paid tax there was never a question of residency but now there is Is Australia the lucky country? yes when your fit and paying (in my case) 48% income tax, not so lucky when your seriously ill though. There is something very unastralian happening at C/L regarding residency. How can you live in a country for 50 years and then become a non resident all of a sudden when they have to pay us for something we have already funded ourselves through paying tax?? The mungrels need to be beaten at their own game. Everyone needs to get pro active in 2 areas. 1. medical. there have already been posts urging all DSP'ers to see your doctor with any new conditions and deterioration of current. 2. Residency Share accommodation may not cut it when push comes to shove. Leasing an apartment in your name including all amenities and claiming rent assistance as well. Own some stock and shares but not much. Any other suggestions anyone?
|
|
|
Post by Banker on Nov 25, 2011 13:51:59 GMT 7
Well okay so what we know for sure is C/L is cracking down with their own version of residency as was predicted by some. It matters not that when we were able to work and paid tax there was never a question of residency but now there is Is Australia the lucky country? yes when your fit and paying (in my case) 48% income tax, not so lucky when your seriously ill though. There is something very unastralian happening at C/L regarding residency. How can you live in a country for 50 years and then become a non resident all of a sudden when they have to pay us for something we have already funded ourselves through paying tax?? The mungrels need to be beaten at their own game. Everyone needs to get pro active in 2 areas. 1. medical. there have already been posts urging all DSP'ers to see your doctor with any new conditions and deterioration of current. 2. Residency Share accommodation may not cut it when push comes to shove. Leasing an apartment in your name including all amenities and claiming rent assistance as well. Own some stock and shares but not much. Any other suggestions anyone? Zorro, I put this on the forum 14/11/11. As Pensioners we have some challengers coming up against C/L and the Government, we must take them on over some of the current issues like.
Non qualified C/L staff being able to over rule a qualified Doctor's medical report or certificate.
Residency issues.
Changes being made to our files, you can get access to these by applying for your file under the FOI. (You might get a surprise as to some of the lies they put on your file)
C/L staff bluffing people into signing documents. (more on this later)
Please add any other issues you can think of.
We have to get our game plan together. I wish more members like Rod would come back & lets us know how they go with C/L interviews etc, It can help others.
|
|
|
Post by blacktulipvampire on Nov 27, 2011 15:03:36 GMT 7
Thanks Banker. Life hasn't been so great, but you get that.
Sorry that I don't seem to have much to contribute, but I do appreciate what others are putting up.
I like your other site, well done.
|
|
|
Post by brad61 on Dec 13, 2011 13:14:41 GMT 7
Hi guys, i have been offered a job in china teaching oral english, and luckily my girl to who happens to be a teacher here ..free furnished accommodation and food and only 22 hours teaching a week..pay isnt to bad for chinas price of living...now i cant go running home every 13 weeks..well maybe once...and im guessing thats coming to an end soon anyways.. ..so when im eventually cut of dsp..can i then re-apply once back in aus?is there a waiting period or basically right away...just want to way up the pros and cons before accepting this job..i would have only been out of aus 1 year as of feb 2012...
|
|