State pension for qualified adult refused as she is joint owner of holiday home

D

Dustin

Registered User
Messages
5
When I reached the age of 66 this year, I was entitled to claim my full state pension which I am now receiving. I tried to claim for an additional state pension for my wife as a Qualified Adult as she is younger than I. She has no assets in her own name other than a 50% share in a holiday home which is for our own use and is not used as an investment. Social Welfare assess any assets owned by the Qualified Adult and calculated an income based on valuing 50% of the holiday home. This meant they disallowed nearly all her pension.
I have without success tried to get this reversed.
Has anyone had any experience of this issue and if so is there a way to make a successful claim?

Dustin
 
On the face of it the assessment criteria seem pretty clear:

"...any asset the customer owns and could derive benefit from, including ... houses, other buildings, yards, farmland or other property which is invested or put to profitable use, or is capable of being invested or put to profitable use but is not; ...
Where property is held jointly (e.g. by a couple), half the value of the asset is taken as belonging to each; ...
Where an asset is not put to a ‘profitable use’, the current market value is determined and used as the basis for assessment."​

From your description it sounds like Social Welfare assessed it correctly.
 
Hi Dustin

On what basis did you try to get it reversed?

You might think that the rule is unfair, but as dub_nerd points out, it seems fairly clear cut?

Brendan
 
Thanks Dub nerd for your information

I agree the rule is clear cut but I discussed with SW about the fairness of this and the suggestion was to try to get value assessed on basis of holiday home potential income which is low and perhaps this would create a lower capital value. I don't know if this has been tested. It would probably mean looking to rent property out but I don't want to do this unless there is a possibility of reassessment. Just wanted to check if anyone has found a different way of approaching this

Dustin
 
What if the house was only in your name? Who paid for the property by the way?
 
Had she transferred her 50% to you some years ago there would be no issue here. She would receive the full QA
 
Thanks Bronte / Black Sheep

I paid for the property but the criteria is in whose name it is in now.
If the property was only in my name there would have been no issue

I only became aware of this issue this year when applying for my wifes additional pension. Part of the SW checks is to ask about any assets which she divested in the last 5 years. So you are right - if I had transferred the asset to myself more than 5 years ago there would have no issue.
So part of the purpose of this thread is for others to plan this process a long time before applying for the state pension!!!
 
Does this mean you can transfer it now and in 5 years she can get a pension?

What's really gas is that you were the one paid for it and in my book it means you're solely beneficially entitled to it. There is case law on this.

How about just selling it. And use her share to buy a car, go on holidays etc. Give gifts to the kids.
 
I would argue that the property is not capable of being put to profitable use . You paid for it , you gifted a joint ownership to your wife and you will not give permission for it to be rented out .
 
Brontente

I don't know the answer re transfer / 5 years time - but when you complete the form now it asks about the assets now. You would then have to reapply for her in 5 years time.

Good point on by beneficial entitlement - but they simply apply who is on the title deeds as owning the property. Also the mortgage is in our joint names. I think it would be a hard slog to prove.

Selling would mean that she would still have to show what she done with her share as they would then assess her on the cash!!!

We like the house and our family want to continue to use it!

Pinesky

Good point - but to SW it does not matter what you use it for - they take the capital value and impute an income to it.
 
I don’t want to stray too far from what has to be a very interesting thread but does the same apply in the event both husband and wife reach pension age and have the required stamps paid over the years.
 
Hi No - both will be eligible separately and there is no financial assessment on either
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top