Benefit cheat next door moaning cos she got caught

Fran

surfcat wrote:

but Fran, this site is about money saving. It's obvious much more people will moan about taxes being squandered on fraudulent benefit than moan about murderers. It's not vigilanteexpert.com after all.

By your argument, we shouldn't vent about train delays, c**p call centres, cash machine fees because murders go on. Let's deregulate everything and concentrate on preventing the serious crimes.

I don't understand how that you don't understand people getting angry when others claim things fraudulently that they are paying for with their taxes.

By my argument, a murderer costs you far more - there's police, courts etc. and then the cost of keeping them in prison! (And the cost of rehabilitation etc. when they get out!) Who's paying for that?

Scout

I'm sorry, but what exactly is your problem Fran? I have known this woman for a number of years and I was close to her once and before you make assumptions again, I am a woman, not a man. We still chat, but not as often as we did.

What I KNOW is this....

her monthly income and that of her husband, because she tells me.It varies because of how much she brings home cash in hand.

I'm not saying her younger does not have autism. What I said was that she deliberately feeds her kids e-numbers before doctors appointments because it makes them go off their heads. SHE has told me this and thinks it's funny AND she tells me it will help her get higher DLA etc.

I know how to get the best out of her kids. When I and another friend look after them, we can get them to be disciplined and polite, without resorting to violence/locking them in the cellar (her actions, not mine) She came to me for advice re the kids and I pointed her in the right direction re diet and activities etc. She has done none of it. She will get anyone to look after her kids so she doesn't have to. Unfortunately for her, people are backing off rapidly, including her family.

I KNOW what she does all day ie lunching out, having manicures etc because I've seen and she tells me.

I don't have to justify why I have reported her - I'm actually not against anyone earning a 'little bit on the side' - emphasis on the little. What I am against is the fact that whilst she is getting her carers allowance and DLA, which she is entitled to, (we'll not get into a heated discussion here about this) she is basically "ripping the @rse" out of the system. As a carer, she can earn £70 per week before it affects your £44 a week payment. (I am a carer, before you ask) I object to someone earning £300 - £700 pcm and not declaring it, and that's not including her husband's cash in hand income. If she's lying about these figures, then that's her fault for telling everyone this. To make matters worse, because another friend of ours has 3 kids, but would like 4 (she's not going to) she moaned at her and said she didn't see why she should pay for people who had large families! The only thing this other friend gets is 3 x child benefit. Her husband doesn't earn a lot.

Sounds to me like sour grapes from someone who has been caught themselves - apologies if not . I know murder, rape etc is worse, it's just that there are many thousands more people who screw the system and take the hard-working taxpayers money, without a by-your-leave.

Fran

Scout wrote:

...... I have known this woman for a number of years and I was close to her once and before you make assumptions again, I am a woman, not a man. We still chat, but not as often as we did.

Yes I did assume your gender, sorry if that offended, but now you've said that "you were close to her" that's possibly why you feel so annoyed with her.

What I KNOW is this....

her monthly income and that of her husband, because she tells me.It varies because of how much she brings home cash in hand.

I'm not saying her younger does not have autism. What I said was that she deliberately feeds her kids e-numbers before doctors appointments because it makes them go off their heads. SHE has told me this and thinks it's funny AND she tells me it will help her get higher DLA etc.

I know how to get the best out of her kids. When I and another friend look after them, we can get them to be disciplined and polite, without resorting to violence/locking them in the cellar (her actions, not mine) She came to me for advice re the kids and I pointed her in the right direction re diet and activities etc. She has done none of it.

If she's locking them in the cellar, surely it's social services you should be contacting?

What I am against is the fact that whilst she is getting her carers allowance and DLA, which she is entitled to, (we'll not get into a heated discussion here about this) she is basically "ripping the @rse" out of the system. As a carer, she can earn £70 per week before it affects your £44 a week payment. (I am a carer, before you ask) I object to someone earning £300 - £700 pcm and not declaring it, and that's not including her husband's cash in hand income.

Ok, now I understand - it wasn't clear what you were reporting her for from your original post.

Sounds to me like sour grapes from someone who has been caught themselves - apologies if not .

You are wrong there. It just p*** me off to see yet another benefit fraud thread as though it's the only crime that happens! What gets to me is that when benefit fraud is talked about it reflects on the genuine claimants and probably puts people off claiming who are entitled too. Because of the high profile the government campaign has given to stamping it out, everyone on benefits is looked at with suspicion and scrutinized by neighbours/ acquaintances.

Karl_Karlsson

Originally posted by Fran
What gets to me is that when benefit fraud is talked about it reflects on the genuine claimants and probably puts people off claiming who are entitled too. Because of the high profile the government campaign has given to stamping it out, everyone on benefits is looked at with suspicion and scrutinized by neighbours/ acquaintances.



Unlike the people complaining about it Fran, who you instantly assume are prejudiced against benefit claimants?

aliasojo

*** Note from Board Guide: Okay everyone, I'm making an executive (;)) decision here, and I'm locking the thread. I think everyone has made their point and I feel that there is a strong possibility that this will disintegrate into an argument if it continues any further. Hope you all understand. ***