Would you report someone for benefit fraud?

sh1981

rozmister wrote: »

My mum left me alone from 13 upwards to go out with her new boyfriend, sometimes all night. That did not make my home or upbringing any less loving and it didn't do me damage. I would also have been capable of looking after an 11 year old sibling if I'd had one. I'm not sure what the law says about the whole thing but leaving a teenager caring for a pre-teen sibling is hardly child neglect!

If you think she's making a fraudulent benefit claim just report her and get it over and done with. If there's nothing untoward, it won't matter. I think it's a bit unfair to be making snipey comments about how terrible her children's upbringing is, again if you have concerns report them to social services and let them deal with it. Only those without sin should cast the first stone and even then you have no idea if you'd still be quite so sinless if you'd had the same life as she's had!

I said the same thing!

Morglin

FluffyDuck3 wrote: »

According to the governments recommendation page, parents shouldn't leave a child under 16 alone overnight.

https://www.gov.uk/law-on-leaving-your-child-home-alone

Yeah, there's no hard and fast rule, and a lot would depend on the maturity of the child involved.

In the end, it comes down to parental common sense, as they know their kids better than anyone.

Years ago, it wouldn't have been seen as any sort of problem, but then I suppose kids used to be more self reliant than they are now.

However, to get back to the subject, concerns about the well being of a child are nothing to do with benefits, and anyone seriously concerned about a child should be contacting Social Services.

Lin

going_nowhere_fast

sh1981 wrote: »

What if she's lying? Could it be?

She, if she is working from home or "nights"....

going_nowhere_fast

rozmister wrote: »

My mum left me alone from 13 upwards to go out with her new boyfriend, sometimes all night. That did not make my home or upbringing any less loving and it didn't do me damage. I would also have been capable of looking after an 11 year old sibling if I'd had one. I'm not sure what the law says about the whole thing but leaving a teenager caring for a pre-teen sibling is hardly child neglect!

If you think she's making a fraudulent benefit claim just report her and get it over and done with. If there's nothing untoward, it won't matter. I think it's a bit unfair to be making snipey comments about how terrible her children's upbringing is, again if you have concerns report them to social services and let them deal with it. Only those without sin should cast the first stone and even then you have no idea if you'd still be quite so sinless if you'd had the same life as she's had!

I guess everyone has different views of good parenting - I certainly don't agree with leaving a child of those kind of ages home alone to go out on a date or drinking etc. I think it's selfsh and neglectful. You can do that when your child is older or is being looked after by someone you trust.

I can understand why you think i'm making "snipey" comments but I guess the difference is I see more of the situation that what you've read on this forum. Obviously to make sure everyone concerned remains anonomous I will never go in to too much detail so you're only ever going to know part of the story so to speak.

I think some people feel that as long as a child is fed and clothed they are being well looked after and I disagree with that. A child has emotional needs too. I think lack of care, lack of respect, swearing at a child, threatening them, spending no time with them, letting them come and go as they please whatever time of the day or night it is (and I mean very late at night), leaving a child home alone - it's not only very bad parenting it's neglect.

Nobody is perfect and we don't know what life other people have had but there is no excuse for treating your children like that.

The reason I asked the original question on this thread was because somebody said to me they should be reported for benefit fraud because what they are doing i.e. claiming as a single parent when they are not is wrong. I agree with what they said in principal. I am someone who disagrees with benefit fraud and hope that people who do it are caught and are made to pay it back but at the same time I'm not someone who would report it. Maybe that makes me a hypocrite.

Only in this instance it did cross my mind, and it was the treatment of the children that made it cross my mind because it genuinely is awful and it's unpleasant to witness. Nobody is going to help those children because technically they are looked after - they have food, clothes, a bed to sleep in but they are treated like they are completely unimportant and nothing more than an inconvenience. They don't know what it's like to have a mum who really cares about them and wants to be close to them. I'm guessing that they are going to grow up to be one of two people (1) they will see how bad they were treated and vow to be a better person and a better parent themselves or (2) they will be exactly the same because that is the only real example of how to behave they have had and it's sad. What child deserves their mum telling them to f*kc off when all they have done is cry and tell them they want to spend some time together (i know, i hear and see it regularly).

I am living in a area where i am desperate to move away from and these people are examples of why.

dktreesea

dippy3103 wrote: »

If she hasn't been interviewed I can't see how they reached that decision.. The customer is invited to interview without fail in those investigations

Yes, but in the interim they stop the benefit payments, to avoid any chance of there being further overpayments, if indeed the claim of fraud turns out to be proven.

dippy3103

dktreesea wrote: »

Yes, but in the interim they stop the benefit payments, to avoid any chance of there being further overpayments, if indeed the claim of fraud turns out to be proven.

No they don't. Benefit is never suspended until such time as here is evidence to suggest that the claim is incorrect. The only exception is where the customer has been asked to supply information or attend am interview and hasn't

Morglin

dktreesea wrote: »

Yes, but in the interim they stop the benefit payments, to avoid any chance of there being further overpayments, if indeed the claim of fraud turns out to be proven.

Many alleged fraud accusations, that are investigated, can take weeks, if not months to get anywhere, and, on that basis, they cannot and would not suspend benefits during that time.

It would cause hardship in cases where there hasn't actually been any wrong doing, which is quite common, (or where the DWP cannot prove any fraud or overpayments.)

Until a case is proven, benefits continue as normal, and then, if there has been an overpayment, the claimant pays it back, from the benefits they are entitled to, at x amount a week.

If they are no longer claiming, and are working, an Attachment of Earnings can be applied.

As Dippy said, the only time they would stop is if a claimant did not turn up for an interview, then they would stop them purely to try and force the claimant to contact them.

Lin