Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Pushed over the edge by benefit cheats!

447 replies

CheekyChoppers · 09/04/2012 15:59

I'm getting increasingly annoyed with my neighbours family, we're very close and have been for a long time, but they are just so loose cheeky it makes me want to do something! But at the same time I don't know if I should just mind my own!!

My neighbour has three daughters;

Daughter 'A' lives in a council property with her children and claims all her entitled benefits as a single parent. Her long term boyfriend also lives with her, and he works full time earning a lot of money. He owns his own property which they rent out to make more cash for themselves!

Daughter 'B' lives in a council property with her son and claims benefits as a single person, although her partner also lives there and works full time.

Daughter 'C' (this is what's really pissed me off today!). She is married and lives with her husband and children in their own (mortgaged) property. They both work and earn good money. She however has made a dodgy application to the council housing list and has been offered a property which they are goin to accept! They plan to sell their home!

It annoys the hell out of me that so much money is being fraudulently claimed, and that it is clearly so easy to do. I really want to dob the cheeky bastards in, although am abit scared they'll find out it was me! And don't know if I should just mind my own beeswax!

OP posts:
JosephineCD · 09/04/2012 19:12

Estimated fraud rates are just that, estimates. Nobody knows for sure, because if they did, they'd know who was defrauding and be able to stop them.

I think people are WAY too defensive when it comes to benefits. The amount we pay out in benefits in this country is ridiculous and not sustainable. Either we cut back or the whole system just collapses.

Peachy · 09/04/2012 19:12

There was one of the head honchos from CrimWatch on TV recently, he ahs been handed partial responsibility for benefit fraud reports now; they said that the vast majority of fraud calls were either stupid (no understanding of system- you know the sort of thing, reporting people who get DLA Care for being able to walk) or malevolent. The actual % passed as far as compoiance was tiny.

This is also my experience when doing admin for a very different fraud section in what was at that time the VAT Office.

Mind if I based my experiences of everyone on a mix of people I have worked with , there'd be a 99% prevalance of severe disability. All of whom would have their own business, often farming, and be unable to provide unsupported care for their famillies.

I've had some niche jobs!

Dawndonna · 09/04/2012 19:13

I am Real
Is that the same as I am Spartacus Coz I am you know, really!

catgirl1976 · 09/04/2012 19:15

Nobody knows for sure, because if they did, they'd know who was defrauding and be able to stop them.

Are you sure? Only before you said you had the same people in defrauding you on a weekly basis. And you had big thick files full of fraudy evidence. But every week, back they came, pulling the wool over your eyes again and again...........

tethersend · 09/04/2012 19:15

"I think people are WAY too defensive when it comes to benefits. The amount we pay out in benefits in this country is ridiculous and not sustainable. Either we cut back or the whole system just collapses."

BANTER- HahahahHAHAH!

Anniegetyourgun · 09/04/2012 19:18

"Either we cut back or the whole system just collapses."

Or we find more money to pay for it. Let's just say, at a wild venture, all those taxes that large corporations are somehow avoiding paying? That would help.

LineRunner · 09/04/2012 19:18

So if your fraid office had all these big fat files of evidence on people, Josephine, how were they able to carry on committing fraud week after week?

Why on earth weren't they prosecuted?

JosephineCD · 09/04/2012 19:18

Are you sure? Only before you said you had the same people in defrauding you on a weekly basis. And you had big thick files full of fraudy evidence. But every week, back they came, pulling the wool over your eyes again and again...........
We had nothing to do with paying out the benefits, just investigating fraud.

BANTER- HahahahHAHAH!
True though. If we keep going on as we are at the moment, the system will collaspse in the next 20 years. Benefits have to be cut across the board, and paid on a basis of what we can afford, not what people "need" or are "entitled to".

LineRunner · 09/04/2012 19:19

sorry fraud you know what I mean

LadyBeagleEyes · 09/04/2012 19:19

Skips of the thread after IamtheSand clutching her lovely shiny new straw.

SerialKipper · 09/04/2012 19:19

Yep Annie and Peachy, it's about proportionality.

For example, no one here would doubt that some drivers act illegally. But if we set up roadblocks into every major city every day to check tax, insurance and roadworthiness of every vehicle, drivers might get a little peeved.

Ditto if we had name-and-shame press coverage of everyone who overstayed in a car park or speeded. TV programmes called Murderers and Meeks showing a 50/50 split of law-abiding and law-breaking drivers. Media campaigns to dob your neighbour in for parking on a dropped curve.

You might manage to lower offences. But you'd seriously mess with the life of every single driver in order to do so. And it would cost a fortune.

catgirl1976 · 09/04/2012 19:20

We had nothing to do with paying out the benefits, just investigating fraud.

Yes, but you just said if people knew who was committing fraud they could stop them committing fraud.

You knew who was committing fraud but you were seemingly unable to stop them committing fraud.

So I am confused.

BeerTricksPott3r · 09/04/2012 19:20

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Peachy · 09/04/2012 19:20

Glitter yes, 0.5% as DWP estimate.

Although there may be more recent figures I guess.

'The amount we pay out in benefits in this country is ridiculous and not sustainable. Either we cut back or the whole system just collapses.
'

The way we are cutting back the whole system WILL collapse under a weight of homelessness, workfare and disabled people who no longer count as disabled due to rule changes but are no more able to self care or fund than they were the week before when they qualified. Long term, this will save nobody a penny as crisis help is far more costly than maintenance support.

Why help someone remain in their bedsit at £5 a week over the new lower LHA now when you can have that same individual presenting as a drug addicted homeless person with health issues to contend with in six months time? Why keep someone with a milkd MH difficulty supported now when by ignoring them you can face a whole gamut of severe disabiltiies requiring in patient care at close to a grand a week?

Why fund a carer when you can fund a residential palcement for a disabled person? Why pay for teh third child when you can pay manyb eyars of health problems and related employment problems ten years down the line? Why house someone under 25 (the latest crackpot suggestionj, no HB under 25 in ANY SITUATION) when you can let cared for children out of their foster placements with no place fo safety to head to and fund the reparations of the life of crime many will be forced to lead. Why........

yes OK, that's enough example.

Arimaa · 09/04/2012 19:20

I would never say that I condone benefit fraud in general.

But as a feminist, I support 'benefit cheats' like Daughter A and Daughter B. With very very few exceptions, single mums take full and ultimate responsibility for bringing up children. This is an extremely difficult job which I do not envy one bit. It is done at huge sacrifice to the mum's own career, relationships, life choices etc.

Now suppose that mum starts a relationship with a new partner, one who is not her DCs' dad. He might be making some contribution to the household if he is staying with her. However, it's very unlikely that he has 'adopted' the children as his own and become fully responsible for them the way their mum is. Even if he does, this will probably happen after several years of stable relationship. Is she supposed to make herself completely financially dependent on him the day after he first spends the night? This is totally unfair on both of them and the children. She should be paid enough to be able to take care of her kids until they are at the stage of marriage/adoption/common-law equivalents.

What those stupid adverts they had a few years ago ignore is that often the only reason the women's boyfriend might stay over all the time is because she has kids in the house and can't stay over at his!

JosephineCD · 09/04/2012 19:21

^So if your fraid office had all these big fat files of evidence on people, Josephine, how were they able to carry on committing fraud week after week?

Why on earth weren't they prosecuted?^
They were. But they just kept doing the same thing. Usually claiming to have lost a giro that they'd got one of their mates to cash. They'd be constantly repaying the defrauded money out of subsequent benefit payments and just keep doing the same thing. Eventually they'd be jailed but it takes quite a lot to do that.

tethersend · 09/04/2012 19:21

"Benefits have to be cut across the board, and paid on a basis of what we can afford, not what people "need" or are "entitled to"."

PwaaahahhhahhhahahahahHAHAHAH!

Stop it, Josephine, you're killing me!

The tears are running down my legs...

Glitterknickaz · 09/04/2012 19:21

Oh excuse me. Didn't realise I was falling foul of the thread police.
Or are people with disabilities and their carers expected to just meekly roll over and be fucked up the arse by the government without a sound?

SerialKipper · 09/04/2012 19:22

Josephine, are you talking about money-saving cuts now, not fraud?

You do realise that these are not the same thing?

For example, fraud on DLA is about 0.5%, Maria Miller plans to cut the DLA bill by 20%.

It's clear that this money will not come from fraud.

SuePoiblybilt · 09/04/2012 19:23

That's an excellent post Arimaa.

catgirl1976 · 09/04/2012 19:23

Hmmmm

I'd say then Josephone that the system sounds a bit shit and reporting people for benefit is neither a deterrent nor saves the country any money whatsoever as they (by your own admission) keep doing it, keep getting benefits and then eventually, go to jail costing the tax payer an absolute fortune

Given that - I would say it is better not to report people

Wouldn't you?

JosephineCD · 09/04/2012 19:23

^She should be paid enough to be able to take care of her kids until they are at the stage of marriage/adoption/common-law equivalents.&
Paid by who? That's the problem. Where is all this money coming from to fund all these benefits? At the moment it isn't coming from anywhere. It's the deficit, and our children and grandchildren will still be paying for it.

tethersend · 09/04/2012 19:25

"Or are people with disabilities and their carers expected to just meekly roll over and be fucked up the arse by the government without a sound?"

Is that the DLA eligibility test?

BeerTricksPott3r · 09/04/2012 19:25

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

TwinkleTwinklyStars · 09/04/2012 19:26

All you can really do is call up the relevant authorities and report them for benefit fraud.