friend may go to prison for benefit fraud. AIBU to think its unfair her partner will get off scot free?

[balenciaga]

there is a back story here, which i will try and keep brief. my good friend has been with a guy on and off for 4 years, he was amazing at first and promised the earth as they do, then he became very abusive (mentally, physically and financially) and she was frightened of him. He even left her twice for 2 different women but she took him back. However, 2 months ago she finally left him (thank god) and moved back home to her mums and is starting again, looking for a house, a job etc.

she has 4 dcs and turns out she was claiming as a single parent the whole time he was with her :( I am not making excuses for her but she was scared to stop claiming as he would not contribute financially and she was scared of not being able to pay bills, eat etc. Also, he pressured her into keeping claiming (which I can WELL believe) and assured her it would be fine, no one would know etc - basically so he could carry on spending his wages like water living rent free and doing whatever the fuck he pleased.

she only told me a few weeks ago what had happened. while she was still with her ex, she had been called in for an interview with the fraud team at DWP as they had suspicions and she confessed it all to them. I couldn't believe she had done it TBH but as much as I absolutely do not condone what she's done I can kind of understand her reasons, its not black and white, yes I did think why the hell did you not leave him earlier etc but its not that easy is it :(

her court date was yesterday. because of the length of time she kept the fraud up for and the amount of money involved (over 33k and that's just HB and income support - ie before tax credits even ) the judge pretty much decided as soon as she went in that the case would go straight to Crown. Her solicitor has warned her that a prison sentence is a real possibility :(

AIBU to think this could be quite a common reason for women committing benefit fraud? and that the law seriously needs looking at and these cocklodging bastards of an ex should also be made accountable?? it takes two ffs !!

Oh god here we go again, she has had 4 kids, she couldnt work to support them (good old state to the rescue) and then decided to committ fraud.

Not her fault of course 'had emotional issues and poor self esteem' - well that's Ok then...

Thank goodness for Rommell injecting a bit of empathy.

This is what happens when you try to fit messy, complicated lives together with a rigid, bureaucratic system.

Sadly the friend of the OP does need to face some consequences, for her sake I hope not imprisonment. But we need a much better, more responsive, more understanding benefits system that would help prevent these kind of situations arising. Much much faster claim processing would help, perhaps some kind of short-term amnesty to enable people to change a claim without facing scrutiny.

Unfortunately whilst it seems the complete inability to fashion even a basically function Universal Credit system we're not going to get my first wish. And whilst we're living in a world where pretty much all politicians are going out of their way to be tough on benefits claimants in general and fraud in particular we're not going to get the second.

^^

As a level headed career woman I chose what I thought was a responsible sensible hardworking man, who was also mid-thrities & earning good money to father my child. My kid was planned, but dear daddy changed his mind at 7 months gestation and doesn't pay maintenance. the shock of having made such a dismal choice has contributed to my decade long celibacy since.

The demands of raising a child alone has meant that even though I'm on benefits I had NO idea that on meeting a new partner I could be potentially quite so vulnerable. (I don't get the same opportunities some women do to get out there and gossip about life the universe and everything) I suspect many single parents are in the same boat. Running a home, raising children, working etc alone means many of us experience varying degrees of social isolation and lack time for the informative small talk that could in some circumstances protect us from situations like the OP's friend.

My point is that I can smell the daily fail stereotypes and prejudices about single mothers leaping out of some posts. Lone parenthood happens for a variety of reasons, in my social circle I know one lady whose 20 year, 4 kid marriage dissolved overnight when her husband suddenly decided he preferred an older brassier floosy who openly sneered at his domestication with his wife. Another friends hubby died of cancer, yet another husband had some sort of breakdown, turned violent and the mother of his four kids had to flee to a refuge.

The divorce rate in the UK is 40%, 2 in 5 children are born out of wedlock. I'm quoting this to remind some posters that the comfortable, smug position they think they are in today, may not remain so for the duration of their child's upbringing. No woman I've ever met of any age has actively consciously chosen to hunt down a barsteward to breed with! they all seem sweet, charming and kind to begin with!

handcream - read please. I said that we did not know if any of these applied to the OPs friend. I was talking in general terms.

It's right that benefits get cut when a new partner moves into your home.

Otherwise you might as well just say no one has to care for anyone- the state pays.

It's sad that she couldn't resist this twat.

But this women is clearly choosing wrongly time and time again. Some consequences surely need to be in place when she then decided to pretend that she was a single parent.

If I make a mistake at work I need to accept responsibility. If I make a serious mistake I could be fired. I cannot start bleating that I was brought up by a single parent (I was!) or that I have two children who need caring for and that I need to be let off.

^You don't just fall into letting a man move in with you, ^

And yet people do. Not you, granted, but it certainly happens. Whether it should or not is another question entirely, but the rigid benefits system doesn't take account of people's not-entirely-ordered, ticky-boxy real lives.

Good post bochead

After reading this thread I think single parents can't have casual arrangements when the man stays over a few times a week like other women do. It has to be all or nothing in the eyes of the benefits system, which incidentally includes many working parents nowadays because of tax credits.

I can easily see how it would be very, very easy for a woman in the grey area between casual and fully committed to get herself into trouble. You don't go on one coffee date and then marry immediately. Good relationships progress over time towards lifetime commitment, especially when the feelings of the children involved have to be taken into account.

There's a few things about the UK system at present, I just can't get my head round the most significant of which being wtf can't we get biological fathers to pay for their own damn kids? Culturally & legally there are so many barriers it's crazy yet other nations manage it, in some US states it's an appalling social stigma to be called a "deadbeat Dad". WHY is the state so happy to pick up the tab, and why do subsequent partners of men with existing kids often actively encourage them not to pay maintenance?

It does seem as if the deck is loaded in favour of the feckless and the abusive partner when he be the cocklodger or the absent bio parent. I can only conclude that our society is still deeply misogynistic at heart, despite all the so called leaps of progress in favour of women and children over the last few decades.

Why is the mother with the children being castigated for not working enough but the father who lives elsewhere not?

Because she's a benefits cheat?

just a guess!

"single parents cant have casual relations where the man stays over a few times a week"

Surely though, any decent parent wouldnt be doing that anyway? Children dont need to see a parade of "uncles" in their house.

I dont think the state is happy to pick up the tab hence recent changes. Sadly they have no choice if the parent wont work or works little. Fair enough to slate the NRP if they dont pay child support whilst the PWC works full time but if they arer not supporting the child either then they are no better.

"Why is the mother with the children being castigated for not working enough but the father who lives elsewhere not?"

Theres been no mention either way of the father/s paying support or not paying it has there?

Yes - the OP stated that the father was on benefits and provided his CSA amount based on that.

Caruthers - the mother is not only being castigated for her cheating (which incidentally it seems she has admitted and is sorry for) but for having four kids and not working more.

I think the "staying over" is not a parade of uncles, but most relationships progress from dating to staying over to maybe one of you letting your flat and moving in with the other on a trial basis to a permanent live in arrangement within a single relatiinship.

BusinessUnusual

If she's sorry about it then that's ok then isn't it?

Of course it's not, and it's clear that's not what my post, which was in response to yours, was about.

Posters are saying "there need to be consequences" - there are consequences and the mother in question accepts them. The original question was whether the consequences should be shared.

Missed that Business, it says the split with the dad was a long time ago. Add on four yeas with this parter and all the children will be at school for 30 hours a week. She could have easily have worked more hours then and not needed benefits so free to have whoever she liked living with her.

Assuming he could work then yes the NRP paying the minimum CSA benefit amount is wrong however the mother wasnt paying for the children either by much more. Tax payers are. Little rich to slate the ex if you are not doing it yourself either.

What are you going on about BusinessUnusual.

The thread deteriorated into 'Ways she can get away with it' from the 4th post on.

Next came the blame game.

Then came the it's everyone elses fault but hers.

But please carry on.

Maybe, maybe not - part time on a low wage may well have been 30 hours or similar.

Still, if she was working part time she was doing more than the NRP (of course the cost to the state of housing benefit etc for the five of them should be laid half to the NRP's "reckoning account" and half to hers)

entirely, but the rigid benefits system doesn't take account of people's not-entirely-ordered, ticky-boxy real lives.

And nor should it, because it is not unreasonable to expect adults with children to take at least some responsibility for themselves.

The benefit system already allows people not to take financial responsibility for the children they create, and in some circumstances that's a good thing, but adults, even adults that have had more than their fair share of life's shit, cannot absolve themselves of responsibility for the choices they consciously make.

I am shocked that so many appear to find it easy to be judgemental and harsh. You must be those people that I've heard about with perfect lives, who've never made a wrong decision, or taken a wrong turn, or met the wrong person at the wrong time or been in a position where there was no 'right' decision.

Or maybe, when (or if) you did get it wrong, you had the intellectual, physical, family or financial resources to reverse out of it without too much damage done? Well done, you.

Thank you Mintyy, Rommell and Mignonette (and all others) for putting the opposite view.

If income support was being claimed, i think you can only earn £20 so theres no way it could have been thirty hours. So maybe three hours a week if minimum wage.

You reap what you sow, break the law and pay the consequences. Its not like its unknown.

I've made lots of poor decisions, I have not committed fraud, repeatedly over a period of time.

I'm shocked at how many people think putting cock over kids is fine.

So many people seem to be missing the point that she was happy to commit benefit fraud, even when he was being nice and promising her everything.

So happy in fact, that she didn't worry about signing off before he had the chance to show himself as a liar.

If she had seriously sat him down and discussed money and legalities before allowing him to move in, then she would have signed off immediately...as soon as he started living there.

But she was quite happy to commit fraud instead.