Benefit Fraud

HappyMJ

notechno wrote: »

Not always so, our council departments compare details with each other, and also with TV Licensing, Sky and credit reference agencies

That would be a breach of data protection. My local council has a statement on it's website "We will not disclose your personal information to third parties". To me I would consider Sky to be a third party. A credit search cannot be conducted without the permission of the customer unless they are actually investigating a potential fraud. The person mentioned in the OP is moving a bus stop why would the bus stop moving department conduct a credit search on them or check with TV licensing (another 3rd party) to see if they were the occupier?

notechno

Bury MBC certainly have - a large number of claimants were contacted as the council had checked with credit reference agencies and their details didn't match those of the council. I know for sure, as there was a report about it in the local paper at the time

missapril75

LunaLady wrote: »

Though it always surprises me how much people know about other people's finances. I dont know any of my family.friends and they dont know about mine.

A common feature in these reports is that the person allegedly fiddling "shows off" about it.

If you're not fiddling, there's no reason to brag.

HappyMJ

notechno wrote: »

Bury MBC certainly have - a large number of claimants were contacted as the council had checked with credit reference agencies and their details didn't match those of the council. I know for sure, as there was a report about it in the local paper at the time

It would have started with a simple enquiry on a public database such as the electoral roll. If they didn't exist on the electoral roll or other occupiers existed on the roll on a single claim then they would have started an investigation authorizing further checks. Nothing would have happened on a bus stop moving request.

notechno

I guess not, no - maybe Big Brother isn't watching us as much as we're led to believe

geoffky

Look what we have become...reminds me of east Germany and the stassi..
And no i do not condone fraud of any type but i will bet a few people on here at one stage has been economical with the truth on tax or expenses..
If the tax magicians paid what they should it would wipe out the deficit in one go...They are the ones you should be directing your vitriol at.

tiddlertot

geoffky wrote: »

Look what we have become...reminds me of east Germany and the stassi..
And no i do not condone fraud of any type but i will bet a few people on here at one stage has been economical with the truth on tax or expenses..
If the tax magicians paid what they should it would wipe out the deficit in one go...They are the ones you should be directing your vitriol at.

In my opinion and probably for the majority of people, one of the most despicable crimes in this country is the theft of money by those that see benefit fraud as 'just one of those things'. Something along the lines of 'there is no victim involved is there?'

Sanctions are not hard enough.Anyone that is found to be either exagerating a claim, telling lies etc should have benefits removed for a minimum of 3 years for the first offence to 7 years as the ultimate sanction.

Yes I am more that willing to report anybody, anytime if I think that they are involved.
I use my mobile phone camera as evidence especially for Blue Badge offences. As a typical example I photgraphed my neighbour from a bedroom window at times when it was clear that he could walk more than 50 metres with no ill effects. How did I know that he was receiving DLA HRM - he has a motability car with an exempt tax disc.

montymud

I do not agree with Benefit fraud in anyway. We find it bloody hard to make a crust and Christmas has us worried. BUT OP If she is your niece therefore a member of your family would it not be wiser in the grand scheme of things to speak to her about it? I agree shes out of order to be committing benefit fraud and I am not questioning your actions - Benefit Fraud is benefit fraud. Is she the kind of person you culd sit down with and give a good ticking off and get her to change her ways?

Muttleythefrog

tiddlertot wrote: »

Anyone that is found to be either exagerating a claim, telling lies etc should have benefits removed for a minimum of 3 years for the first offence to 7 years as the ultimate sanction.

I wonder what punishment you think appropriate for someone doing same relentlessly on the internet Andy.

lovinituk

Muttleythefrog wrote: »

I wonder what punishment you think appropriate for someone doing same relentlessly on the internet Andy.

What benefits do you get from lying and exaggerating on the internet?!