Means Test for dependant on Contributory pension

There may have been less than full disclosure at time of application, or lack of informing of changes in financial circumstances.

The fact that Revenue are embedded in SW offices now and the bank information they can get under AML suggest that maybe they have been advised of the 200k

OP the adult dependent portion of your grandfathers state pension has been means tested for at least 25 years now and when your grandparents were awarded the payment they were notified that they, by law, had to notify the department of any “change in circumstances”.

If they neglected to inform the dept of the private pension and the sale of the house then they are on the wrong foot here right from the start so any talk of fighting “this” can go out the window.

The fact that they are elderly is neither here nor there. The fact that they are being reviewed after 22 years is neither here nor there.

If your grandmother has been in receipt of money that she wasn’t entitled to then it will all have to be repaid to the state.

SW don’t have any choice in this. It’s simply the law. My advice is to totally co operate to the nth degree here. In some circumstances some of the proceeds of the sale of the house can be disregarded but if I was honest it doesn’t appear that it applies in this case.

There’s nothing to worry about as long as they approach this in a timely manner with a cards on the table attitude.

Offloading money may not change the outcome of a SW means test. If SW decide that a person is giving away money to avoid a means test, they may base their means assessment to include the money given away.

The HSE do similar for fair deal assessment, they will include assets disposed of up to 5 years prior to application.

Would the proceeds from the sale of the house not fall under the signed undertaking in the Pension Application form that:

I undertake to immediately advise the Department of any change in the circumstances of me or my spouse, civil partner or cohabitant which may affect my continued entitlement?

(I'm assuming here that neither the pensioner nor the QA bothered to inform the Department about the windfall. Apologies if I'm wrong.)

They actually will include the “given away” money in the means test as they will assume, with good reason, that the money has been “given away” to avoid the means test and will be “given back” as soon as the dust settles.

I understand the reason for having joint accounts- it makes sense in case of the death of one partner. Unfortunately, it looks like a major mistake when it comes to a situation like we are told about here.

Joint accounts means that the wife owns half of everything what is on the accounts. So the wife has loads of means which were not declared. In a means test half of everything on the joint accounts will be taken into acount- the other half will be seen as belonging to the husband and will be ignored. The wife can own up to 20000 Euros ( I am not sure about this figure- it could be less)- this will be disregarded as well.

gov.ie - Operational Guidelines: Means Assessment (www.gov.ie)

There is something about a sale of the house in that one as well.

So when you wrote "the means test request" you didn't say "request"! 🙄 Gotchya, thanks for the clarification.

Medical card is the HSE. Yes I agree though. One Dept disregards 20, the other 72. It’s a bit inconsistent.

Half Baked suggestions you say 🙄, what is it about trying to help others that offends people like you, who seem to use this site to be snide & petulant. OP ultimately will have to deal with this, all I and others have offered is guidence & perfectly reasonable suggestions.

You don't decide what I or others post

SW will set the new rate of payment for your grandmother after the means test.

The new tax situation will be reflected in your grandparents next income declaration they have to make when it is due. It looks like there is even a positive side for your grandparents in this affair.

Fuel allowance is means tested as well...

Few intelligent people would regard posting a link to an exclusion that doesn't apply to people receiving the State Contributory pension as a perfectly reasonable suggestion.

Next time, instead of firing off a succession of ill-informed, half-baked suggestions why not first read the relevant Social Welfare Operational Instruction(s) that apply - and then you can pontificate from an informed position to your heart's content.

Can I ask a question about the means test which I've always wondered about but no one has ever mentioned?

Say you are assessed for means as having €100,000? What happens if over a period of time you spend that money or go out and buy a new car? Can you go back and just ask for another means test? I assume you are allowed to buy a new car if you are on means tested benefit and that you aren't expected to keep the money in the bank forever?

Absolutely. You can apply for non con pension again at any time. It would be a brand new application as they won’t keep your last application open for any more then a month.

Keep receipts. A new car. A new wall. Any home improvements. Went on holiday. Got the ditches cut. Giving generous presents to family and friends unless it’s a wedding present or something like that won’t be allowed. A fill of oil etc of course all fine.

If it all can be accounted for then it shouldn’t be any problem.

To get your head around non con pension or SW means testing I think it helps if you keep in mind what non con pension was intended for.

It was intended for people who for one reason or another found themselves at 66 with no income and not much savings and having made little or no PRSI contributions in their working lives.

Maybe you were in bad health. Maybe you were caring for someone or different people all your life. Maybe you were a stay at home parent with a large family.

But you need money to live every week so there is the non con pension.

Let’s be honest. If you have €100000 in the bank then you don’t need help every week to live. The idea that you should be able to get state money in order to be able to leave your children a large chunk of inheritance in your will is just crazy. But lots of Irish people think like that. Good luck.

When you open a bank account you give the bank your PPSN.

When you apply for a means tested SW payment, SW can see that you have accounts linked to your PPSN. So they ask you to send them 3 month statements of that account.

They will also ask them to send proof that the old bank account is closed. (They can see that they USED to have an account ).

So to be clear, if you advise your grandparents, in an effort to defraud the state, to close one bank account and open another, then all you will be doing is putting them to the bother of getting 3 month statements from the new accounts, and letters from other banks to say that they’ve closed accounts.

Gael…can I say…I’m quite concerned at this stage that you seem to be advising your grandparents and you don’t seem to realise that:

A. Trying to defraud the taxpayer is wrong.

B. Your grandparents can end up getting a court summons and a fine.

It may be that you are concerned that you aren’t going to get your inheritance if your grandmother doesn’t continue to get a payment from SW.

If your grandparents have a large amount of savings then your grandmother simply doesn’t NEED a payment for herself right now.

She can live very comfortably on her savings, can’t she?

Your grandfather is getting his pension commensurate with his lifetimes contributions. That’s perfectly correct.

But I’d really like to hear from you why it is you think that, despite them being very financially comfortable, they also need the taxpayer to give them extra, to the point where you are exploring avenues which would involve them actually breaking the law?