Case Studies » One Parent Family » One Parent Family Payment - Case from 2016 Annual Report (ref: 2016/08)

2016/08 One-Parent Family Payment

Oral hearing

Question at issue: Cohabitation

Background: The appellant’s baby was born in 2015 when she and her partner were living together. Subsequently, she made a claim for One-Parent Family Payment, stating that they had separated and that she was parenting alone. The claim was rejected on grounds that she and her partner were living together as cohabitants.

Oral hearing: The appellant was unaccompanied and the Social Welfare Inspector attended by request. The Appeals Officer referred to the Deciding Officer’s statement that he had relied on the Inspector’s report in determining that the qualifying criteria were not met and he asked for an outline of the details.

The Social Welfare Inspector reported that he had made an un-notified call to the appellant’s home and interviewed her in connection with her claim. He stated that he had also interviewed her some eight months previously in connection with a Jobseeker’s Allowance claim. That payment had been awarded at a reduced rate, based on an assessment of means derived from her partner’s income from employment. The Inspector stated that, at the time, the appellant had sought a review of the assessment on the basis that her partner had to pay maintenance in respect of a child from an earlier relationship and that this should have been taken into account in determining means. He advised, however, that no adjustment had been made to the assessment and he noted that the appellant had made a claim for One-Parent Family Payment some months later. In his report to the Deciding Officer, he opined that the appellant and her partner had decided to separate after she received an unfavourable decision in connection with her Jobseeker’s Allowance claim. He noted that the appellant had stated that she was receiving maintenance of €100.00 per week.

In response, the appellant stated that her former partner had been paying maintenance in respect of two children from a former relationship, and not one as the Inspector had stated. She contended that there was no concrete proof of cohabitation and asserted that there had been a lot of speculation. She went on to say that she considered this to have been a defamation of her character.

The appellant submitted that she and her partner had personal issues following the birth of their child in 2015. She stated that he had not been a good parent and had not helped out at home. She said that she had relied on the support of her parents, including the provision of financial assistance. She insisted that the separation had not been just for financial reasons and asserted that she was only guilty of not having had a perfect relationship.

Consideration: The Appeals Officer sought to determine whether the appellant could be held to meet the relevant qualifying condition for receipt of One-Parent Family Payment, having been disqualified on grounds of cohabitation. He noted the provisions of the governing legislation relating to cohabitation, outlined in Section 2(1) of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005:

‘cohabitant’ means a cohabitant within the meaning of section 172(1) of the Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabitants Act 2010;

and the disqualification at Section 175 in relation One-Parent Family Payment:

A person referred to in section 173(1) shall not, if and so long as that person is a cohabitant, be entitled to and shall be disqualified for receiving payment of One-Parent Family Payment.

The Appeals Officer made reference also to Guidelines on Cohabitation which the Department of Social Protection has issued for the information of Deciding Officers. He noted that this outlines the criteria by which cohabitation might be assessed and indicates that no single criterion can necessarily support a decision. He examined the evidence in the case by reference to the criteria set out in the Guidelines, including the following: the duration of the relationship, the basis on which the couple lives together, and the degree of financial inter-dependence. He noted that the appellant was emphatic in her assertion that she was not cohabiting with effect from the date specified. He noted also that the evidence submitted by the Department was circumstantial, relating to the appellant and her partner having separated after an unfavourable decision in relation to Jobseeker’s Allowance, while the appellant had outlined a number of reasons for their separation. He concluded that the evidence did not establish a basis for determining that the appellant and the person named were a couple living in a ‘committed and intimate’ relationship at the time of her claim for One-Parent Family Payment.

Outcome: Appeal allowed.