Centrelink Silliness

[Banjo]

One of the strangest thing Centrelink do, in my opinion, involves people in relationships with someone who:

i) Is not on, or entitled to a Centrelink benefit
ii) Has no other income.

The Centrelink recipient who is currently on a single persons payment, has it reduced to half the combined relationship benefit.
Forgive me if I don't do the maths but it's quite a bit less, trust me on this.

I first heard of this when Ansett went through the hoop, two of their laid off employees were in a relationship, one was an Aussie resident but hadn't been there long enough for NewStart.

This is just plain silly, surely Centrelink must realise that if someone living overseas and enters in a relationship it's possible that person will conceal the relationship?
It must be better for the government to know about this if they have any pretence of caring about their citizens. (A quick visit to any Aussie embassy overseas will soon correct that misapprehension anyway).

[Banker]

Jan 20, 2011 10:31:57 GMT 7 Banjo said:

One of the strangest thing Centrelink do, in my opinion, involves people in relationships with someone who:

i) Is not on, or entitled to a Centrelink benefit
ii) Has no other income.

The Centrelink recipient who is currently on a single persons payment, has it reduced to half the combined relationship benefit.
Forgive me if I don't do the maths but it's quite a bit less, trust me on this.

I first heard of this when Ansett went through the hoop, two of their laid off employees were in a relationship, one was an Aussie resident but hadn't been there long enough for NewStart.

This is just plain silly, surely Centrelink must realise that if someone living overseas and enters in a relationship it's possible that person will conceal the relationship?
It must be better for the government to know about this if they have any pretence of caring about their citizens. (A quick visit to any Aussie embassy overseas will soon correct that misapprehension anyway).

Banjo, your thinking common sense I dont recall a lot of that at C/L

[pauley]

Have picked this post to highjack because it as close to my topic as I could find

Why is it that centerlink can have me on the new start very quickly but it takes them a life time to work out that I can have the dsp? My doctor has proved I should have it so why does it take so meny weeks for them to type it into a computer? Maybe the self service should include you typing in all the info for them so they don't need to do so much ha ha. How hard could it realy be changing some one from N/S to DSP? Yes I am runing out of patience!!!

If yahoo can't understand the spelling of words that I look up how the hell can I get a job that involes writing? Yes they did try to make me do that type of job. To long a story to go into

[Banjo]

I thought it had to be done within 6 weeks of you completing your application.
Give spaceyone a PM, she's just got hers through.
They back pay you to the date of application anyway.

[pauley]

Yea I will give spaceyone a pm a bit latter. Well for now I suepose they are holding onto my travel money but am sick of being so poor.

[spaceyone]

Hi Pauley

You are on the right thread for asking why it takes so long to process a DSP application - you will experience centrelink silliness at its finest.

They are supposed to process it all within 6 weeks. That includes JCA interview and assessment. Have you had that yet?

The rest of the time, your application will just sit around. I think the 6 week rule was imposed onto them, to stop them deliberately stretching certain people out.

If you get a letter of rejection, it will contain a phone number to ring to lodge the first appeal. Once you do that they have 28 days to process that.

If you loose that one, appeal again, to the listed number, because that one does take about two months to occur. Then two months to the last one. See the appeals part of the forum.

I applied early July and received the payments near the end of November.

Don't sit back being too confident there, as it is really difficult to get approved. Apart from the game playing, and dealing with public servants, some people get paid a bonus to keep you off it. I have heard there are quotas as well, some towns must have to keep people off to avoid going over that number.

The best you can do while you wait, is attend doctors, get scans and reports of results, etc, to get as much evidence as you can on paper. You can add more info during the appeals process. It is harder for them to argue with proof, and you cannot rely on them just to believe you or understand the limitations your disability places on you. You will also have to prove that you are unable to work.

[pauley]

JCA is that the job center assessment? if so I have and the lady was very nice and said that I got more than the 20 points that center link needs. I first applyed early Jan so by the sounds of things it going to be a long wait. So should I complain if/when it goes over the 6 weeks? I don't think it would help. At least I now know I don't have to report every 2 weeks like I was befor. Is there some one I can bribe to get it done faster just kidding. too confident me naaa I'll send down a rain of teaor if I don't get the dsp. I think it's a right not a privilege well going to shut up now befor I upset any goverment computer nerds.

[spaceyone]

Lol, pauley. Hoping you get lucky and get processed properly and quickly.

You should try to remember when you applied, then you can work out the date for six weeks later and make a note of it. If you haven't heard anything from them, you can then ring them and remind them that their time is running out.

[ram]

I'm not sure if I should be laughing,but it is a bit silly.


www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/only-one-recipient-of-53m-matched-savings-scheme/story-fn59niix-1226022085855

Only one recipient of $53m matched savings scheme

ONLY one person has received the full $500 available under the Gillard government's $53 million matched savings scheme for welfare recipients launched last July.

Welfare advocates say the savings scheme has failed because it is unrealistic to expect people struggling to survive to put any of their limited money away.

To receive the payment, which matches savings dollar for dollar up to $500, those on income management must complete a money management course and show a pattern of saving for a minimum of 13 weeks. Centrelink quarantines the money, available only to those whose income is managed.

It is a successor to the scheme introduced in the 73 indigenous communities subject to the NT Emergency Intervention. The new scheme, funded for four years, has been expanded to those on welfare in the rest of the Northern Territory, and will be introduced to the rest of the country.



Between July 1 and December 31, 102 people entered the scheme, and of these 53 completed the money management course, 36 were still doing it and 12 had dropped out. To date only one person has successfully completed both requirements and received a full matched savings payment.

Community Services Minister Jenny Macklin said this would increase with the number of applicants still in the program.

At a Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs workshop with financial counsellors this month, it is understood concerns were raised about the progress of the schemes.

Ms Macklin said the matched savings payment was an incentive for welfare recipients on compulsory income management to improve their money management skills, encourage positive savings and increase their capacity to set aside money for major expenses and purchases.

"The initiative is one of several financial counselling and money management services that are available to people on income management to help them manage their money," she said.

But National Welfare Rights Network president Maree O'Halloran said there was a serious policy misconception that people on low incomes could not budget effectively.

"Nothing could be further from the truth," she said. "In fact, the opposite is true. People on low incomes are excellent money managers - they have to be.

"The Matched Savings Account appears to be yet another one of the government's income management-linked policies that, it seems, is untried, untested and unpopular.

"The revelation of a next-to-zero take up comes as no surprise to Welfare Rights. The scheme is both complex and misguided. It fails to recognise the reality of such low levels of payments and the proven levels of deprivation that social security recipients experience.

"Even among the most thrifty and frugal there is limited capacity to save."

Ms O'Halloran said the government was disingenuous in promoting the scheme, as the limited capacity to save meant few people would be able to take advantage of the payment of $500.

"People with full-time jobs would have difficulty saving the suggested amount in the government propaganda about the scheme, but to expect a person to save $500 from funds that are income managed is laughable."

Print
Email