Another Family given a 5 bedroom house for lying about being.........................

neverdespairgirl

ninky wrote: »

a judge with access to more information than we have has seen fit to allow her to continue living in the property and has given her punishment deemed adequate for the offence.

He didn't "allow" her to do anything of the sort. He's a Crown Court judge. He doesn't have anything to do with where people live (unless he's bailing them to an address)

chewmylegoff

ninky wrote: »

there are some points people are choosing to ignore;

this woman was already eligible for this house due to her circumstances. lying merely fast-tracked her and her children into it.

the taxpayer was already paying for her accommodation and would have continued to do so until she was permanently rehomed. the existing accommodation may well have been costing the taxpayer more.

i'm not condoning her actions but without knowing more about her situation i don't think it is right to condemn her out of hand.

a judge with access to more information than we have has seen fit to allow her to continue living in the property and has given her punishment deemed adequate for the offence.

actually she wasn't eligible for the house as she wasn't at the front of the queue of people waiting to be housed in it. she cheated someone else out of the property. that other person may well have been in greater need.

you paint this as a victimless crime, but it isn't. we're all paying for it (including through wasted police time, and other crimes that could have been investigated) and some other family who may have been in genuine need of the property have been personally deprived of it.

you accuse others of choosing to ignore points, this is rich given that you are systematically ignoring the point that she committed a serious criminal offence with material consequence to others in each and every one of your posts.

tomterm8

I really think that she should be expelled from the country once her children reach 16. While this may endanger her life, it is her responsibility to obey British law and if she fails to do so, she should not be surprised when she is deported. She should, of course, be given ample opportunity to seek lawful entry to another country if they will have her.

I think any refuge who commits a crime such as fraud, burglary etc should be expelled from the country as soon as realistically possible.

stonethrower

Andy347 wrote: »

No they are a sick digusting racist piece of scum who has seriously breached MSE's rules (let alone the actual law regarding incitement of violence,and, of racial hatred!!

And so Martin Lewis will now have to decide whether hes willing to allow people to post sick twisted stuff on his website like that (and so condoning that kind of stuff himself),
or if he will ban the person and hopefully pass their IP address onto the police.

Take a chill out pill

A._Badger

Andy347 wrote: »

No they are a sick digusting racist piece of scum who has seriously breached MSE's rules (let alone the actual law regarding incitement of violence,and, of racial hatred!!

And so Martin Lewis will now have to decide whether hes willing to allow people to post sick twisted stuff on his website like that (and so condoning that kind of stuff himself),
or if he will ban the person and hopefully pass their IP address onto the police.

And your suggestion that he is 'culled' isn't an incitement to violence?

Hypocritical idiot!

A._Badger

Andy347 wrote: »

No i am not suggesting or inciting that any acts of 'violence' are committed.

I have simply said that the sooner the day comes when a government of this country starts to get tough on racist sickos, and legally brings in the death penalty as the penalty for racism, the better! :beer:

Just as I said, then. You're a hypocritical idiot.

The_White_Horse

i am not racist. what gives you that impression? can no one have an opinion on housing or immigration without being a racist? absolte typical lefty twaddle.

i hate scum to be housed in houses they have no right being in, and dont care if they are somalian scum or white british chav scum. scum is scum. in this particular case, it is so offensive, they dont even have to be scum. NO ONE should be entitled to this.

The_White_Horse

Andy347 wrote: »

Post reported to abuse for the post and you the writer being sick digusting racist scum!! :mad::mad::mad:

The sooner all you racist sickso are culled or deported out of this country the better!

this is obviously someone on a wind up or a retard. which are you?

Shakethedisease

If you were a regular here you'd appreciate that much of that TWH says is tongue-in-cheek. e.g. TWH is very anti benefit claimant, however in practice is more than happy to help contribute towards a regular poster and her disabled children's holiday.

Still.. he does post some pretty offensive stuff. Really offensive actually. It shouldn't matter if you're a 'regular' or not and it's not really 'tongue in cheek' either. It's just blatant bile and hatred towards those 'HE' considers 'scum'.

Andy347 some of us feel the way you do. I also have no idea why he hasn't been banned by now. He's entitled to his opinion of course.. but to me it's always way, way over the top as to what would be acceptable on any forum that deals with such huge demographics and variances of Uk life in terms of finances.

The forum is for people from all walks of life to manage their finances as best they can in their current circimstances or debate aspects of the economy. WH, just makes a lot of posters from the lower income strata ( ie those on benefits, anyone on benefits ).. feel worthless, looked down upon, and well, 'hated' for no particular reason other than he thinks so.

Rampant eugenics ( based on current financial status) and 'starving children' are 'regular' opinons of his as well as 'anti-leftie' rants.

He's a sad, sad person unfortunatley.. who seems to have found some kind of 'acceptance' here as the resident 'right-wing loon'. More to be more pitied than laughed at IMHO. Certainly a poster, that seems to go against the very ethos as to what this site stands for re

Please exercise caution & report any spam, illegal, offensive, racist, libellous post

I reckon he's offended quite a few in his time here. I know I've been by some comments. But, still he posts, and still he offends. Takes all sorts to make a world ( or a forum) eh. Just ignore and calm down a bit.

Ps : It's quite the most 'cliquey' forum I've ever posted on. Which is why you're getting 'it'. You're relatively new and you have an opinion.. some here in the 'usual' way it goes on 'cliquey' forums find it far easier to put you down for your opinion, even when they know, ( and they do know believe me )...that the 'regular' they are defending sometimes goes waaaay too far in his comments. It's easier and more 'cosy' to play down the 'regular's' comments as just 'high jinks' and then start on you instead. Don't let them put you off. We're not all like that..

I have simply said that the sooner the day comes when a government of this country starts to get tough on racist sickos, and legally brings in the death penalty as the penalty for racism, the better!

The above is bordering on the same sort of attitude WH has, best not eh ? Just log off for a bit when you feel rants like that coming on.. it's only a forum at the end of the day. Nothing to get too wound up over..

ninky_2

chewmylegoff wrote: »

actually she wasn't eligible for the house as she wasn't at the front of the queue of people waiting to be housed in it. she cheated someone else out of the property. that other person may well have been in greater need.

.

my understanding is that it wasn't a council house but a privately rented house paid for by housing benefit - presumably because her family is so large the council houses available are not deemed adequate (another crazy rule she herself has not created). in which case there was not a queue of people waiting to be housed in it. such large families are relatively unusual and large homes in the private sector are fairly readily available.

i could be wrong.