Ratting on benefit cheats

Indie_Kid

krisskross wrote: »

I will correct your misapprehension about sticking our noses into other people's business. If I suspect that someone is claiming public money that they are not entitled to then it becomes my business. It should be the business of all of us. The more that is paid to fraudulent claimants then less remains for genuine people. If all claimants were told they were going to have a 10% reduction in their payments to balance the books because of fraudulent claims i bet they would be looking for fraud to be stamped out.

People are wanting fraud to be stamped out - but that doesn't mean wreck innocent peoples' lives in the process. I think that you do report someone, you should have to provide evidence of this fraud and have to give your name. Maybe it would stop people from reporting because they think someone is committing fraud based on nothing, really.

We should all be concerned about this fraud. TBH when someone shouts really loudly about nosey parkers etc it just makes me wonder what they themselves have to hide or worry about.

I have nothing to hide. DWP have bank statements stating how much is in each bank account and due to being messed around by the bank, I've had to give them permission to look at my bank accounts. Would someone with something to hide really do that? I have never lied on my DLA forms either - why would I?

Jowo_2

shikoku wrote: »

Very interesting (and long) article, illustrates clearly how a false or malicious accusation can ruin a life

But also illustrating that some live in couples prefer to pretend to live separately to reduce the employed person's contribution to the household kitty, a preference for the state to pay extra towards the upkeep of their family rather than through their earned income.

dseventy

moonbeam2007 wrote: »

You say it is not your job to get the facts but you see it as your job to stick your nose in other people's business WITHOUT having all the facts? clearly.

I say again. I don't need all the facts. I need a suspicion. I suspect it, I report it.

Its already been posted that few people can know all the facts about someone.

moonbeam2007 wrote: »

The fact is when people are reported it caused huge amounts of stress and upset for the one's who are doing nothing wrong, but when you don't have ALL the facts and just hearsay you think it's ok to cause such upset??

I think its right and proper to report a suspicion. As you say its the DWP job to sort it. Not mine.

moonbeam2007 wrote: »

If you know 100 per cent what someone is doing then ok but still I'd not get involved, I do not work for the DWP it's not my job to do their dirty work and their the one's who give the claims out so it's THEIR job to find out who shouldn't get it.

Where does this line stop? The police. "Can't help them, its not my job".

The DWP want people to report suspicions. They have quite a few ways to do it without revealing your details.

Its their system, you signed up to it, its fair enough.

moonbeam2007 wrote: »

But again there are just too many people thinking their doing a good deed when in fact they just can't help sticking their nose into other people's life's. And as you clearly said 'I do not need the facts' well yes you should have at least that if your going to report someone. :mad:

You asked for someone to "enter" your life when you claimed benefits! You went along and wrote all your personal details on a form, signed it (and all the T&Cs) to "someone" for help in your life.

I will report anyone I suspect of benefit fraud and I encourage all to do so WITHOUT the full facts. You state yourself no-one can possibly know it all but the DWP do.

Regards

D70

moggylover

cit_k wrote: »

A damn site more money is wasted by DWP mistakes and error than benefit fraud, but i dont see people kicking up a stink about it...

To some extent that is irrelevant, however, where it can be proved to be entirely malicious I believe some system needs to be in place to deal with the malicious person as their malice also costs public money and this system is not supposed to be in place to allow people a source for indulging their spite.

My own thoughts are that there is nothing wrong with reporting ones suspicions to the DWP even if you do not have all the facts UNLESS you are prompted only by spite and not suspicion.

However, I think the suspension of benefits whilst the investigation goes on is wholly wrong since it implies guilt without proof which flies entirely in one of the most important and sacrosanct parts of the law in our Country and is the biggest part of the grief that is caused where the report is not warranted.

Having been reported twice whilst on benefits myself (and no case to answer being found on either occasion) assuredly by the same vile person I know first hand how difficult that period can be emotionally without the added problem of the financial side and nothing is then done to help with extra costs that may have resulted from the lack of funds (i.e. overdraft charges and so forth) during that suspension. Contrary to popular belief, not everyone is so well off on benefits that they have several weeks worth of spare money to live on and keep their children fed whilst the investigation takes place and thus many are effectively punished even though entirely innocent.

I also find the double standards often visible in these repeated threads rather hard to take. I have seen people go apoplectic at the thought of someone defrauding the benefits, and yet they see nothing at all wrong with cash-in-hand jobs being done by tradespeople or tax evasion at higher levels.

We will never encourage honesty in Society if we only expect and require that honesty from certain sectors and show poor examples at the top.

Mojisola

Graham29 wrote: »

Does that really happen, the DWP gets 1 phone call and the person who is accused has all their benefits cut off? Is it that simple, or is there more to it?

This is the problem - not the report of possible fraud but the DWP's reaction to it. No-one should have their benefit removed until the fraud has been proved. That would stop the anxiety and problems for honest claimants.

viktory

Flyboy152 wrote: »

But, thankfully, you don't speak for everyone.

I have never said I do.

MissMoneypenny

Perhaps the government should take a leaf out of Microsoft's book, to cut down on welfare fraud. Microsoft ran a "Shop a friend for Christmas" campaign, where they paid £100 to the informant, for every true reporting of thieving.

The government could run it twice a year, just before holiday season time and just before Christmas. They should pay £200 to the informant as they will easily save more than that on each benefit fraud case.

dodger1

JPS29 wrote: »

Again, no offence but if ithey were not your "extended" family and just your "family/blood who you loved the bones of would you still "love" to report them

Honestly I'm not trolling or trying to pi$$ anyone off , just genuinely intrigued

I can see clearly what you are getting at. I honestly believe the majority of people would shop strangers or people they disliked but not friends or family. Yes that's wrong and very hypocritical but it's the way the world works.

mobile48

cit_k wrote: »

A damn site more money is wasted by DWP mistakes and error than benefit fraud, but i dont see people kicking up a stink about it...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/8189689/Ministers-ordered-to-stop-threatening-pensioners-with-court-over-benefit-mistakes.html

System

Note to self don't trust anyone with "a bottle of Oasis, a can of Pepsi Max, a brown leather Radley handbag and a grey nylon backpack. as they are government spies! I knew it wouldn't surprise me if they are still using the old people too.