My olive groves stop me from claiming benefits

[hettyGreek]

Hello,

I've lost my job after many years of full employment. I'm a single mum to two children (5 and 7) and rent a 3 bed flat.

I have savings of about £3'000.00 and the only other asset I have is an olive grove in Greece that was my grandparents and has been in the family for over 100 years. It generates no income due to location, current state and actually costs me money to maintain it. On my forms I used the valuation when I received it of about $25'000.00, but this valuation was before the downturn and it is probably only worth a fraction of this.

Even though it does not generate any income what so ever and I'm unable to change anything in order to make an income for me. The benefits office have decided that it generates an income of 50 pounds a week.

All this has been confirmed from various sources including Money Saving Expert and CAB so I'm not looking for advice on the benefits.

I'm looking on advice as to if this is fair and if it is worth me writing to my MP / doing things to try to change the system. I'm going through the process to try to get an up to date valuation, but with the location this is not so straightforward getting it valued from a source they will respect but this is in progress. Until this is sorted I get nothing bar CBJSA.

It would be difficult to sell, and I would rather not as its been in the family for a long time and has been left to me with the intention to pass it on. If I was left a piece of jewellery this would be exempt and I wouldn't need to sell it, so I think the same should happen with this.

Do I have a point about this and jewellery? Most people on Petty Gripes think I'm being treated unfairly but this is a small sample. People on MSE mostly think this is fair.

Thanks for your time

So you don't think the rich tory voters sign/gif valuable assets over to their children so they can avoid paying tax? Laughable.

but doing it within the law is fair. Outside of the law isn't. Anyone who breaks the law should be punished. Encouraging people to break the law can also be punished (and should be).

Minimising tax liability isn't illegal. Hiding assets or lying about them is. For example, I believe asset deprivation has a seven year liability. If the OP were to gift or "sell the 'grove for £1", it would be illegal.

I think this thread has shown the wheat from the chaff; or the scroungers from those who believe welfare is there to benefit those who absolutely need it.

I think this thread has shown the wheat from the chaff; or the scroungers from those who believe welfare is there to benefit those who absolutely need it.

I think this is a little unfair. I would take the view that welfare is there to benefit those who are eligible for it.

herecomethepotatoes - I don't think that's fair. The op has posted an update saying its difficult to sell or get a valuation with it being Greek with their issues and is struggling as she doesn't speak the language - pettygripes.com/discussion/1054/my-olive-groves-stop-me-from-claiming-benefits

This isn't the same as having cash in the bank. Its some assets that are locked away and she can't liquidate. Very possibly she is in need of benefits as only has a few thousand in savings and no income.

I disagree that anything within the law is fair and outside the law is unfair. There are plenty of shitty selfish things that are perfectly legal.

I think the whole approach to "assets" within the benefits system is completely UNFAIR.

If you are penniless in your youth you can claim without ever having to repay if your circumstances improve. If you are fortunate enough to be independent and prudent in your youth and subsequently fall on hard times you will be penalised for having "fixed the roof while the sun was shining".

If your "inheritance" is still with your living relatives while you need to claim you get benefits. If you are orphaned and receive a small inheritance you cannot claim.

If your DC's future inheritance is safely stashed in your pension plan you can claim. If you keep it in the bank or a btl or a save to buy ISA you cannot.

If you live in your primary asset rent free you can claim (although you do save the state HB) but if you are still saving your first deposit you cannot.

Currently under tax credits assets are not taken into account and current claimants will keep this benefit. Universal credit claimants are subject to the asset rules in the benefit system.

Don't have any helpful suggestions re your plight Op but just wanted to point out some of the inconsistencies and inequities in the current system.

blobbityblob - So for example - if you'd paid off your mortgage but lost your job and had school age dc, would you get tax credits? Or would you be expected to sell your home and rent something with the equity and live off the proceeds until the money ran out?

Of course you're not expected to make yourself homeless. Your home (main residence), is not consider an income, it is considered your residence. Also it costs less in benefits for you to stay owning your home.

Owning land or other houses is considered income because you can usually make money off it and if not you can sell it and still have somewhere to live.

Under those guidelines then the only fair way is if everyone the capable and the incapable the able and the disabled the prudent and the foolish do nothing save nothing leave theur children nothing and let the state keep them oh no wait there won't be anyone to keep them because we are all doing nothing. What an idiotic argument to put forward. This is the fairest system there is give or take we have a welfare state we have an NHS if people stopped abusing it we might even get to keep them.

That was in reply to Howabout not Finally who is spot on

But Lightening my point is that at the moment there is a very strong incentive to do precisely nothing because the "insurance" element within the benefit system has been eroded so far. I can still remember when NI was thought of as primarily social insurance against periods of unemployment.

Why would you save when the state will take what little you have no matter how much tax and NI you have contributed should you ever need support?

I speak Greek and have a reliable realtor who is British over there. It hasn't stopped the value going from 135k to 10 in 10 years and actually now it isn't worth anything because no one can buy or rent it because of red tape. Rates are about 350 a month and have to be paid or the government take it.

Well, howabout, the general idea is not to amass large amounts of money and then convert it into other assets (big house, jewellery, cars, etc) purely so as to become deliberately unemployed and claim the princely sum of £76 a week off your fellow taxpayers.

You could always try it, if that seems so desirable to you

Rates are about 350 a month and have to be paid or the government take it.

That's easy then! OP doesn't pay the rates, and tells the relevant Greek authorities she isn't paying.

Saves a monthly cost she can't afford and clears the ground for her future State dependency.

It is an asset. My DMil has an olive grove in Greece and has built a lovely little villa on it which she lives in half the time/could rent out but doesn't. The land is fertile, if you knew what to do with it, you could easily make a steady income.

Sell it or use it. They are your realistic options.

OP I completely sympathise. Ghastly business. It reminds me of the time I was forced to sell my Italian vineyards so that I could claim tax credits. I wouldn't wish that kind of ordeal upon anybody

No-one is talking about becoming deliberately unemployed garlic. The Op has "worked hard for many years" and still finds herself unemployed with 2 small DC to provide for.

howabout
"Why would you save when the state will take what little you have no matter how much tax and NI you have contributed should you ever need support?"
That's not true. If you have been working and made NI contributions, and then lose your job, you can claim contributory JSA for 6 months. It's not means-tested at all. You can be a millionaire and still get it, as long as you've paid NI. After 6 months if you still have no job or income, you can claim means tested benefits as long as you don't have savings over the limit (£16k I think). That's reasonably fair IMO.

The OP's situation is unusual and is hardly a shining example of everything that's wrong with the benefits system. All she needs to do is demonstrate the current (low) value of the land and she will probably be able to claim something.

bluespiral

It depends on the assets though.
I have a btl that earns me money, I still get tax credits as it is less than the current cut off, much less in fact.
the few grand it makes as profit is declared and my award adjusted accordingly.
When I inherited years ago, they didn't want to know as it didn't provide an income.
I did what they said and declared any interest and this was taken as income, this too wasn't much and the claim was adjusted accordingly.
I know that benefits are different though.
OP, you should be entitled to tax credits unless the ruling has changed over the past few years.

Yeah I pointed out that the OP should be able to get Child Tax Credits on her first thread as well as this one. She didn't acknowledge it. Apparently it's better to start multiple new threads complaining than it is to acknowledge helpful advice you've already received.

Op will get tax credits if that is the system she is in but will not be eligible for universal credit where the benefit system asset rules apply. This is another one of the cuts no-one is talking about within UC.

I don't really think 6 months of taxable £73 a week will go very far with rent to pay and 2 DC.

JSA won't be taxable because it's under the threshold. And she won't be expected to live on just that - they are assuming she has extra means because of the land she told them is worth €25k! And the fact is that Universal Credit hasn't replaced Tax Credits yet, so she will be able to claim them. You are arguing about a scenario that doesn't exist.

JSA is taxable assuming the Op gets another job within the tax year which I think we agree is the best outcome. It is also within the tax credits taper, so assuming Op gets another job and can claim tax credits the "contribution" based JSA will in fact be clawed back at 41% in addition to any tax paid on it. The only reason anyone can still make a new TC claim is because of government ineptitude in rolling out UC.

It's not inept to roll something out gradually - it's disruptive and difficult to manage, but the rationale is that problems can be identified and ironed out while it's still small scale.

I'm not a fan of the government btw, I think they are shit! I'm just saying it's not a bad thing that they haven't rolled out UC credit yet. The longer the delay, the better, tbh.

DP has just mentioned that having profitable land and claiming benefit is what sunk the greek economy in the first place.

Did you manage to get a refund on those diamond shoes that pinched, bluespiral?