Age pension & overseas travel

[johnmac]

Doing a bit of fact-checking: would people mind telling me if the below seems accurate?

I went on the age pension in November.

I then booked OS tickets. I was told that because I've spent most of the last 10 years overseas my pension will be suspended for the duration of the trip.

I also have to stay in Oz for most of the 2 years after my last return for this rule to expire - i.e. to be able to travel OS without losing the pension. (That'll be Feb 2018 for me.)

I have spent enough months in Australia since the age of to receive the full pension (with the above caveats).

To complicate matters a bit, I have further been told that if - within the 2 years - I go to a country with which Australia has a social security agreement (e.g. Greece), I can retain the pension. (There's a certain amount of bureaucracy involved, but it is do-able.)

The two-year rule is technically appealable, but the Centrelink person told me appeals don't generally succeed because this is legislation.

I'm requesting a bit of fact-checking because, in the course of 7 phone calls & visits to Centrelink over 12 months, I was told I could go OS with no limitations; so I booked my tickets. Now I am being told my pension will be suspended for the trip's duration, & that I can't travel other than for brief trips for another 15 months - a sudden & unwelcome reversal. I'd previously asked for their advice to be put in writing: they refused.

Thanks to all...

[Banjo]

As I just said in a previous reply, you could challenge them on residency which is not clearly defined by the legislation.

35 years AWLR should qualify anyone for portability.

[johnmac]

Thanks Banjo.

I accidentally did this this morning. I got put through to another part of the international section in Hobart, to make an unrelated query, & by chance found myself speaking to someone who knew what he was talking about, which was a first.

Without me even asking him he said the two-year rule didn't apply to me (because I'd only been OS for 9 months in the last 2 years, & all my assets etc are in Oz), & so I could travel whenever I liked for as long as I liked.

I asked him how he knew this when everyone else had told me the opposite. "Because I just made a ruling on you," he said: no-one else had done that.

What fooled me was everyone before that saying, "It's legislation - you can't argue with it or appeal it." I guess it is, but the legislation (as you've been saying) gives them the right to make a discretionary decision.

[Banjo]

So you have full portability now?

That's fantastic and goes to show that people should never give up.

It's an important entry for our case law file as well, you say you were away for 10 years but in Australia for the last 2 with 9 months away?

We saw this when we fought the DSP portability/residency rules, you could talk to ten different Centrelink officers and get ten stories, I'm convinced that many were totally ignorant of that part of the legislation and made stuff up on the spot.
In the end they changed the legislation and the Unlimited Portability clause included.

Good news indeed John, we need to get this story more widely available though, I don't suppose you would happen to know a sympathetic journalist.... ?

[johnmac]

Yes Banjo, I've been told I have full portability now. No promised confirming letter yet - but maybe it takes a few days...?

I have been away maybe ten of the last 14 years; of the last 2 years I was away 9 months. The first 4 CL people said the 9 months wouldn't affect anything; the next 2 said it meant I wasn't an Australian "resident" & would forego the pension when travelling OS, & any travel OS beyond holidays - perhaps more than a month - would "zero" the two-year clock again - i.e. the 2-year wait for portability begins again.

Then this morning (my third call in 24 hours & my 7th overall) I was told the same thing. So I thought I'd find out more about travelling to an Agreement country such as Greece - & asked to be transferred to that section (still within the Hobart international travel office). I wanted to see if I could do that.

The guy who handled that said, "Have you ever been assessed as to where you reside?" I said no. He said (looking at my file), "So your house & family & bank accounts are in Australia, right?" I confirmed that they were. He said, "I just assessed you then. You are a resident. You don't need to travel to an Agreement country - you can go anywhere."

The previous people had said it was legislation & couldn't be appealed. Turns out it was discretionary after all.

It is important to note that I have been in Oz for most of the last 2 years (this was crucial), & that I do indeed have a house & family here. I don't have those things OS. They were the determining factors so far as I could tell. The third thing was to actually get assessed - to have a determination made as to your Australian residency. You want to build a case - so have notes ready & offer to send it to them in writing. I didn't realise it, but no assessment had been made as to my residency - i.e. I hadn't been asked questions for the file about where my house & family were. Till this morning they'd just looked at my travel record & drew their own (erroneous) conclusions.

I agree that several officers before this guy did not know the rules & were either misinterpreting the legislation, or making it up as they went.

[Denis-NFA]

All the best johnmac

[Banjo]

Johnmac said:

The previous people had said it was legislation & couldn't be appealed. Turns out it was discretionary after all.

and

Till this morning they'd just looked at my travel record & drew their own (erroneous) conclusions.

Which sums up the attitude of too many Centrelink officers.