This sort of thing annoys non disabled people

gregg1

p00 wrote: »

Perhaps this should be in the 'vent ' thread but this really annoys me.

My neighbour who hasnt worked for over 20 years (bad back) and gets not only a blue badge but full mobility as well and his wife carers allowance has been abroad in their new huge motorhome for 8 weeks earlier this year and now 9 weeks travelling around Europe - with their nice new expensive bicycles in the back.

Should people claiming benefits really be able to take these long extended holidays and still claim off us tax paying workers?

Really? You are jealous of someone with a disability?!!! Jeez!

krisskross

gregg1 wrote: »

Really? You are jealous of someone with a disability?!!! Jeez!

Maybe, just maybe, he is angry that someone is pretending to be disabled in order to claim benefits. It does happen however much you try to insist it doesn't.

Someone claiming 20 years ago before there were such stringent checks could well have had no further interaction apart from the odd form to complete saying condition unchanged. I actually know someone like this......mobility car, BB etc but does all his own gardening, cleans the windows up a ladder, carries heavy bags of shopping, walks without aids as quickly as me. He also apparently has a bad back. And yes I have reported him and sent photographic evidence.

rogerblack

And yet, despite 'everyone knowing someone on the fiddle' - DWP measurements of fraud and error are still about the same as errors in benefit payments due to DWP errors.
And both are well under a percent.
DWP has no reason to minimise fraud reports.

Someone reported me for benefit fraud.
Their impression would be 'nothing has been done'.
In reality, I was called in for an interview.

This lead to extreme stress beforehand, and a week of a significantly worsened condition recovering from the trip back from the interview.
Plus, now I am even more anxious when going out, when I may meet the 2 or 3 people I know vaguely in the village who are likely to have reported this.

The person who reported this however will be certain 'nothing has been done', and 'I know someone on the fiddle, and they did nothing'.

Dunroamin

rogerblack wrote: »

And yet, despite 'everyone knowing someone on the fiddle' - DWP measurements of fraud and error are still about the same as errors in benefit payments due to DWP errors.
And both are well under a percent.
DWP has no reason to minimise fraud reports.

Someone reported me for benefit fraud.
Their impression would be 'nothing has been done'.
In reality, I was called in for an interview.

This lead to extreme stress beforehand, and a week of a significantly worsened condition recovering from the trip back from the interview.
Plus, now I am even more anxious when going out, when I may meet the 2 or 3 people I know vaguely in the village who are likely to have reported this.

The person who reported this however will be certain 'nothing has been done', and 'I know someone on the fiddle, and they did nothing'.

DWP has every reason to minimise fraud reports, which is why it does so.

If someone suspects fraud then they are perfectly right to report it; the fact that it might upset someone is irrelevant. Like most people, if my husband chose to claim disability benefits he would know that he had nothing to fear by a report of fraud or attending an interview.

Disabled people do their cause no good at all by discouraging people from reporting possible fraud or by telling them that they need to be 100% sure.

margaretclare

I get that you posted in good faith but I can only dream of owning a house worth £120k, let alone cars worth that. I would even forego the £120k of cars just to be able to cycle somewhere, the bad back would be a non-issue in the grand scale of all of the other pains I suffer.

No, he said that the house was worth £800k and the cars worth £120K. I was a bit mystified by your comment because, I thought, it doesn't take much for a house to be worth £120K. Our 2-bed bungalow is probably worth that. Who on earth needs cars worth that, and the house must be a near-palace!

margaretclare

jizzler wrote: »

I am in the same situation as yourself except my accident was in Poland, but the same as you decided i moved back here because the benefits system here pays me much much more than it would anywhere else.

Hats off to you my fellow scrounger .

And people wonder why we English get somewhat p***ed off when we read things like this.

Actually a 'bad back' is one of those non-specific terms which can mean a whole range of things.

DH has a 'bad back', you could say. He had spinal surgery in May this year. He had crumbling vertebrae and a prolapsed spinal disc which had prolapsed inwards causing pressure on his spinal cord with risk of permanent paralysis. There was a risk that he might have come out of hospital in a wheelchair but in the event, he can still stand on 2 legs. No matter how skilful and innovative the surgery, however, nothing is ever going to be as good as new.

Errata

It beats me how people know what benefits other people are on when they decide to report them.

rogerblack

Dunroamin wrote: »

DWP has every reason to minimise fraud reports, which is why it does so.

If someone suspects fraud then they are perfectly right to report it; the fact that it might upset someone is irrelevant. Like most people, if my husband chose to claim disability benefits he would know that he had nothing to fear by a report of fraud or attending an interview.

Disabled people do their cause no good at all by discouraging people from reporting possible fraud or by telling them that they need to be 100% sure.

Do in principle I object to being questioned about my entitlement to benefit - no.

In practice, this has caused me problems, and will continue to do so, and has reduced somewhat the time that I have available to do activities that may lead to me getting off benefits.

Could you perhaps elaborate on why the DWP would downplay fraud?

Dunroamin

rogerblack wrote: »

Could you perhaps elaborate on why the DWP would downplay fraud?

It hardly makes them look efficient to admit that the misclaiming of benefits is higher than it is. Rather in the same way that the police downplay certain crime statistics.

BobQ

Dunroamin wrote: »

Disabled people do their cause no good at all by discouraging people from reporting possible fraud or by telling them that they need to be 100% sure.

Oh what a good point. Any malicious person, disgruntled neighbour, or ignorant fool should be able to stir up trouble for someone who has been assessed by an independent expert as having a disability.