Devious interpretation of child benefit rules
If a child is seriously ill in hospital for more than a month, the department deems that the child is not in the care of the parent and that the normal place of residence is the hospital - not the parental home.
On that basis, the department will seek reimbursement of any child benefit paid to the parents because, in their view, it should have been paid to the hospital.
When it was pointed out to the department that legal custody of the child is vested in the parents, the response was that legal custody in relation to child benefit was irrelevant.
How many parents have been the victims of this devious application of the department’s interpretation of the rules on child benefit?
The rules should be clarified to state that child benefit should be paid to the legal guardian, no matter how long the child is in hospital.
Alan McGivergan
Barnewall
Donabate
Co Dublin
