There's been some recent discussion on applying for the OAP if you've been living overseas.
Word of mouth seems to be that returnees must live in Australia for two years before they are eligible OR must stay in Australia for two years after it's granted.
Discuss.
Banjo,
I wanted to start a new thread but I couldn't,
The reason being that there are so many boards, sub boards and threads basically covering the same topic, it is confusing.
You might remember that once I was declared to be a former resident, took them on and won.
I think the new rules have been applied because of that.
But the basics are still there.
I have just been on the phone to C/L Int and informed that I will be returning to Oz later this month and was worried that I would be subject to the remain at home for two years.
The guy noted that I was an OZ resident and had no concerns.
However he did mention that if I returned to Thailand in the near future then my residency might be reassessed but I would retain full portability of my pension.
Having been through the roundabouts I would like to offer my take on it all, from the outside looking in.
First of all;
The biggest problem for every body is establishing residency and in C/L's eyes you either have it or you don't and there is no argument.
The C/L people are governed by a set of guide lines derived from the act and interpreted by C/L hierarchy with an obvious bias.
Secondly;
C/L staff have a duty of care to their customers, which they don't always portray.
There has always been a former resident rule even when I applied for the OAP but it was hidden, never mentioned and it is in an obscure part of the act. Why?
Because there is something wrong with it. Not sure what but sure it is wrong.
Why was it created? After the war a huge no of Europeans emigrated to find work. They made good money here and sent it back to their own country and followed their money 10 years later. When they were approaching 65, they returned, claimed the pension and disappeared back home again. that was the base of my submission to the AAT. And that's when you talk face to face with the C/L legal eagles.
After that the case was resolved in my favour without going to the tribunal.
IMO the current former residence rules are based on a false premise and if challenged will be successful at the AAT.
The point of all this is to advise people to look outside the box; forget what C/L tell you and plan a submission for the AAT. Unless you have a good case just go through the procedures with the ARO and SSAT and save your bullets for the AAT. They can deal with legalities and are probably on your side to a certain extent.
There are some common misconceptions and one ie that the AAT made a ruling that an absence of up to 3 years can be classed as temporary. This is ignored by the SSAT and probably never brought up.
Have a look at previous AAT rulings on the subject OAP.
Read Welfare Rights guide for people assisting pensioners.
And make sure you have studied the act.
Always be kind and courteous to C/L staff, they are only following orders and only tell them what you want them to know.
And APPEAL, APPEAL, APPEAL.
Appealing is not scary, doesn't affect your relationship with C/L, costs you nothing and is done by phone that they pay for.
The most important thing is to get and maintain Oz residency.