Money Moral Dilemma: Should I report couple fraudulently claiming benefits?
Tr@cker
Posts: 532 Forumite
A married couple living together full time, both unemployed and who you know to be claiming at separate addresses.
I believe there's quite a difference of income but dont know exactly how much.
I personally find it a moral dilemma but readily understand why many hardworking, honest people wouldn't think twice about reporting them.
Official MoneySavingExpert.com insert, 3 June 2014: We've adopted this dilemma for our weekly email. Thanks to Tr@cker for the original posting.
[threadbanner]box[/threadbanner]
0
Comments
-
Yes i would, if people claimed for an entitled benefit rather than fraudulently there may be more in the pot for the most deserving.0
-
Why is it a moral dilemma?
They are stealing from both the tax payer & the needy (there is only so much in the pot).0 -
If you are sure of the facts, then there is no dilemma...0
-
"there is only so much in the pot"
umm, yup spend it on wars or give pay rises to MPs0 -
If you are sure of the facts, then there is no dilemma...
They are both drug addicts and i know from a simple, free check on 192.com that they are on the electoral roll at separate addresses.
The dilemma for me is that im simply not comfortable with grassing anybody up. On the other hand all those who say there'd be more in the pot for genuine claimants cant be faulted.0 -
enfield_freddy wrote: »"there is only so much in the pot"
umm, yup spend it on wars or give pay rises to MPs
Yeah, they haven't locked up any fraudsters in the Banking industry either. As far as i know.0 -
maybe if they collected taxes from the rich and stopped hounding the poor
"The total value of contracts that had been awarded to Atos by June 2013 was approximately £1.6bn.[42] It was disclosed in November 2013 through the National Audit Office that Atos paid no Corporation Tax at all in the UK in 2012.[43] "0 -
They are both drug addicts and i know from a simple, free check on 192.com that they are on the electoral roll at separate addresses.
The dilemma for me is that im simply not comfortable with grassing anybody up. On the other hand all those who say there'd be more in the pot for genuine claimants cant be faulted.
Not sure how accurate 192.com is so can't comment on that I'm afraid.
I understand that you may feel uncomfortable, but I'm sure if, for example, someone saw your vehicle being stolen, you'd want them to give as much info to the authorities as possible especially if they 'knew' the thief.
I absolutely deplore thieves.... :mad:0 -
Not sure how accurate 192.com is so can't comment on that I'm afraid.
I understand that you may feel uncomfortable, but I'm sure if, for example, someone saw your vehicle being stolen, you'd want them to give as much info to the authorities as possible especially if they 'knew' the thief.
I absolutely deplore thieves.... :mad:
Atos included in that? they have stolen/not paid corporation tax therefore stealing from the UK taxpayer0 -
Not sure how accurate 192.com is so can't comment on that I'm afraid.
I understand that you may feel uncomfortable, but I'm sure if, for example, someone saw your vehicle being stolen, you'd want them to give as much info to the authorities as possible especially if they 'knew' the thief.
I absolutely deplore thieves.... :mad:
192.com is definately accurate in this case cos i know both addresses very well.
Somebody nicking my car would obviously affect me directly so i'd want any info i could get.
Benefit scamming isn't a victimless crime really but its indirect.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.6K Spending & Discounts
- 235.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 607.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards