Articles

Residential-Care Subsidy Update - Eligibility Improved

Thursday, July 20, 2017

The High Court, in Broadbent v The Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development [2017] NZHC 1499 (a test case), has told the Ministry of Social Development that it is not correctly applying the means testing assessment for income when determining someone's eligibility for a residential-care subsidy.

On Mrs Broadbent's application for a rest home subsidy the Ministry accepted that her "permissible" gifting to her trust of $27,000.00 per annum prior to the period commencing on the date five years before the date on which she applied for a subsidy, did not disqualify her for a subsidy at the first asset test stage of the means assessment.  However when it conducted the second stage of the means test concerning income the Ministry's policy or practice of deeming that the applicant had deprived herself of the income streams associated with the earlier gifted assets was applied.  Accordingly it quantified the amount and then treated it as her income for the purposes of the income assessment process.  As a result it put her income above the income threshold necessary for her to qualify for a residential care subsidy and it was declined.   Mrs Broadbent therefore had to pay the maximum sum towards her rest home care.

The Ministry was held by the Court to be wrong in treating this so called deprived income as Mrs Broadbent's own.  In saying this the Court applied basic common law principles concerning the nature of gifts.  The Judge, Justice Katz, noted that whilst the Ministry's practice may well be consistent with its policy objectives that people should use the resources available to them before seeking financial support from the state, it did not accord with the statutory scheme of the Social Security Act 1964 and the Social Security (Long-Term Residential-Care) Regulations 2005.  Rather the statutory scheme had to be aligned with the longstanding principles of common law of what is an unconditional gift of an asset to another person, namely that it includes all the rights, benefits and entitlements associated with the gifted asset including any right or entitlement to future income.  The Judge said that "there is nothing to suggest that Parliament envisaged that either allowable gifting (in the sum of $6,000.00 per annum) or permissible gifting (in the sum of $27,000.00 per annum) was intended to be conditional in nature.  In the absence of some clear indication to the contrary, such gifting must be considered to be unconditional".  In Mrs  Broadbent's case her gifting was no different to the standard unconditional gifting settlors make to a trust which did not retain the right to the income which the asset might in the future generate.  Accordingly the Ministry was wrong to factor that income actual or notional back into the means assessment process when assessing her eligibility for a residential-care subsidy.

This judgment was issued on 30 June 2017.  The Ministry has a right to appeal it within 20 working days.  It will be interesting to see if that occurs and if any legislative amendment ends up happening.

If you have any questions or concerns about this topic please contact Peter Fuscic on (09) 306 6746 (pfuscic@mcveaghfleming.co.nz) from our Auckland City Office.

 

This article is published for general information purposes only.  Legal content in this article is necessarily of a general nature and should not be relied upon as legal advice.  If you require specific legal advice in respect of any legal issue, you should always engage a lawyer to provide that advice.   

 

Recent Posts


Tags

Ministry of Social Development Interpretation Act 1999 Subsidies Employment Personal Properties and Securities Act 1999 Immigration New Zealand Wills Act 2007 Section 11 Offending Financial services provider (FSP) Tenant Marriage Privacy Act 1993 Eviction Albany Office Interest Limitation Act 1950 Will that do Financial Advisers Act 2008 Landlord Clayton case Blackwell v Hollings Amundson v Raos WINZ Domestic violence Unfair contract terms Protection Order Financial products Resident Deceased's wishes Legislation update Intellectual Property Wills Twelve years Fair Trading Act 1986 White v White Constructive trusts Commercial Law Maritime Law Lease Titles Will Physical abuse Protector Elder Law Validity of Wills Resident Visa Invalid wills Frustration Mortgagee Reckless Trading Abuse Mortgage Civil union Work and Income Vessel Sale and Purchase Violence Terms of Trade Duress Domestic Violence Act 1995 Shareholders' Agreement Gifting Charity begins at home Recovery of money Grey Power Document Disclosure Broadbent v Ministry of Social Development Wills Act 2007 Section 8 Interpretation Act 1999 Section 29 Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 (FMCA) Compensation Family Trusts Ilott v Mitson 2017 UKSC 17 Part payment Commercial Property Lankow v Rose Lump sum Sale of Goods SN v MN [2017] NZCA 289 Income Section 15 Family Protection Act 1955 Testamentary Promises Limitation Act 2010 Trust Check Up Section 182 Family Proceedings Act 1980 Asset Protection Vessel survey Partner of resident Tamarapa v Byerley Charity Vessel surveyor Section 15A Six years Re Estate of Feron Loss of income KiwiSaver Personal Tenants Interpretation of documents Murrell v Hamilton Company Law Skilled migrant Temper Break up Hawkes Bay Trustee Company Limited v Judd Acknowledgment of Debt Charities Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 Financial services Auckland Office Partnership based work visa Property Ship Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003 (CCCFA) Expression of interest Wilson v Donnellan Rest Home Subsidies Directors' Duties Economic disadvantage Visa application Relationship Property Business Due Diligence Character requirements Skilled migrant points Beneficiary Rights Body Corporate Principal Administrators duty Verbal abuse Commercial Wills Act 2007 Health and Safety Reform Bill Acknowledgment Pattern of offending Testamentary freedom Litigation Seperation Contract Law Valid wills Companies Act 1993 Property (Relationships) Act 1976 Erceg v Erceg Fair share Limitation defence Creating Trusts Division of Functions De facto Psychological abuse Immigration Testamentary writing Testamentary capacity SMC Trust Confidentiality Trust busting Insurance Changes ''Best Endeavours'' Gifts Re Estate of Campbell Executors duty Repayment Trusts Bill Anti-money laundering (AML) Lease Zero Hour Contracts Estate Administration Residential Case Study Wills Act 2007 Section 14 Living standards Limitation period Ministry Consumer credit contracts Trustee Duties Claims against estates Undue influence Trusts Mortgagor

Archive