DLA fraud check

Breast_Cancer_Survivor

Trialia wrote: »

I appreciate the apology - but if you're talking about your own kids, please specify that next time? Being generalised about is something that really sets me off.

I can imagine, me too.

I was on a rant & not thinking clearly.

I assume that people see things the way that I see them (if you know what I mean) & my kids are the only kids I know but obviously other people reading wouldn't know that.

Trialia

Breast_Cancer_Survivor wrote: »

I can imagine, me too.

I was on a rant & not thinking clearly.

I assume that people see things the way that I see them (if you know what I mean) & my kids are the only kids I know but obviously other people reading wouldn't know that.

*nods* As an Aspie, I do know - cognitive empathy fail. Thanks for the apology; it's fine.

Oldernotwiser

Breast_Cancer_Survivor wrote: »

I assume that people see things the way that I see them (if you know what I mean) & my kids are the only kids I know but obviously other people reading wouldn't know that.

So, what you're actually saying is that your children have no respect for you?

Breast_Cancer_Survivor

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

So, what you're actually saying is that your children have no respect for you?

What i'm actually saying as I don't know how they feel & can only go by their behaviour is that I don't feel as if my kids respect me.

The social worker things they are rude to me & tbh they probably are.

I've let things slide abit the last couple of years due to my depression but i've made them up spreadsheets with their chore's on so will see how they go.

I don't take it personally as it's most likely their autism that makes them behave the way they are.

I always thought I respected my parents but thinking about it I was probably just afraid of them & I didn't want my kids to be frightened of me.

SingleSue

Come on guys, can we please at least try to get on with each other.....I keep saying, we all have different experiences which impacts on our perception.

Maybe, that needs to be kept in mind whilst reading posts and make an attempt to see things from the other view point (which ever one that is, not taking sides at all here!)

davsidipp

reading the posts on the thread its starting to get like a slanging match between certain posters .peoples disabilities affect them differently and posters should realise it not make fun of them.

TheBottomLine_2

krisskross wrote: »

I think it is a bit sad that the fact we use it to pay for taxis etc is a minus point.

You actually said;

krisskross wrote: »

I think it is great that a man who had an extremely poor upbringing (deserted lone parent mother, lived in London through the blitz, no child benefit or tax credits etc) can actually have a bit of comfort and luxury.

I don't think the AA is for spending on luxury.

krisskross wrote: »

Everyone claiming DLA is horrified at the thought of having to account for how the cash is spent. Why? If you all spend it solely on disability related stuff then that is what it is for.

Everyone? I can happily produce taxi receipts to show where my £18.95 per week goes. I'm looking forward to having a medical because I meet the criteria for high rate mobility in April.

krisskross wrote: »

You might get the cash but you need to use it to get what you say you need. Otherwise it is simply extra pocket money.

You said yourself that all your husbands care needs are met for free so all the AA he gets must be extra pocket money then. You've also admitted you spend it on other things, whether they are luxuries or not does not matter, they are other things. You are berating others for this when you do it yourself, and you only suspect that others are doing it with no proof. You have admitted that you do it.

Such hypocrisy.

krisskross

TheBottomLine wrote: »

You said yourself that all your husbands care needs are met for free so all the AA he gets must be extra pocket money then. You've also admitted you spend it on other things, whether they are luxuries or not does not matter, they are other things. You are berating others for this when you do it yourself, and you only suspect that others are doing it with no proof. You have admitted that you do it.

Such hypocrisy.

I agree. However surely it would be more hypocritical to claim the cash then leave the care needs unmet which a lot of posters appear to do.

Would it make you feel better if I said I charge him £10 an hour? However he can only afford 7 hours a week so hasn't had any of his injections administered this week because he can't afford it.

I was earning £25 per hour but I give him a special rate......after all he is my husband:rotfl:

TheBottomLine_2

krisskross wrote: »

I agree.

Let's drop it then.

krisskross wrote: »

However surely it would be more hypocritical to claim the cash then leave the care needs unmet which a lot of posters appear to do.

I've tried to understand that in the past and had some discussion about it too. I can't figure out how the extra money helps if a person is still not getting the care they say they need. I've asked on these forums but nobody will tell me, it's like a secret or something.

Huh?! Do we agree on something? Hold the front page! :rotfl:

WhiteHorse

krisskross wrote:

Do you not think this would mean that no one would report anyone? The government WANTS possible benefit cheats reported. I think it is the duty of all of us to report anyone we suspect is claiming fraudulently.

Fair enough up to a point ... but are malicious allegations not also something that should be punished? They waste the taxpayers money too.

If someone has to prove their claim is above board so what? If I was claiming from the public purse I would be more than happy to, indeed I would expect to have to, prove my entitlement to the money I was receiving.

Again, true up to a point. No-one really objects to having to prove the validity of their claim. But then again, don't forget either that you pay National Insurance (the clue is in the word insurance), to cover this eventuality. If you've paid in, you are are entitled to take out.