Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

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

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

438 replies

balenciaga · 27/02/2014 11:08

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 Hmm - 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 Shock ) 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 !!

OP posts:
Mintyy · 27/02/2014 22:27

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

caruthers · 27/02/2014 22:27

No he isn't.

I have never heard anything so ridiculous.

BusinessUnusual · 27/02/2014 22:28

Responsible in what way, WooWoo? If you aren't claiming from the government, they normally don't care what you do.

But I think if you are cohabiting with a higher earner unrelated to your kids, you still lose CB.

WooWooOwl · 27/02/2014 22:28

WooWoo, the mental, physical and financial abuse he committed...?

They are different issues and will be dealt with separately should the ops friend choose to complain about them, and that would be the case whether or not the fraud was detected.

Abuse and fraud are not the same thing.

TetrisBlock · 27/02/2014 22:29

Why else would the government stop paying benefits if they didn't assume that the family were being supported somehow?

BusinessUnusual · 27/02/2014 22:29

Yy but you said what she'd done was way worse than what he did - ?

caruthers · 27/02/2014 22:29

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Mintyy · 27/02/2014 22:30

If he isn't responsible then why can't she carry on claiming benefits?

caruthers · 27/02/2014 22:31

She shouldn't have him there Minty.

Tada problem solved.

WooWooOwl · 27/02/2014 22:32

So he's not actually legally responsible, it's just that he becomes responsible by default if the mother claims benefits?

My DH isn't a higher earner, but I was just wondering if I'd need to inform DH that his support of my (not his) children wasn't really just because he loves us, but is instead because he's legally required to!

fideline · 27/02/2014 22:32

Caruthers have you ever been a primary carer? Do you feel you have special insight?

Mintyy · 27/02/2014 22:33

Caruthers
You've had 16 messages deleted, 11 on one thread.

caruthers · 27/02/2014 22:34

fideline

Are you assuming I haven't because i'm male?

She's a thief and was caught.

TetrisBlock · 27/02/2014 22:34

No, no, the government just presumes him to be taking responsibility for the family. Therein lies the problem. He wasn't.

Mintyy · 27/02/2014 22:35

Caruthers
He shouldn't have moved in with her, made promises he didn't keep, let alone physically and emotionally abuse her. Ta-da! problem solved. If only he weren't a prize wanker, she wouldn't be facing prison.

racmun · 27/02/2014 22:35

Sorry but she knew what she was doing. He treated her like shit and yet she still chose to commit fraud rather than finish with him once and for all.

By the sounds of it there is no chance of repayment so what option does the court have?

Floggingmolly · 27/02/2014 22:36

The presumption is there, the onus is on the claimant to prove it wrong.

WooWooOwl · 27/02/2014 22:36

Right, so he wasn't legally responsible, therefore he did nothing wrong.

BusinessUnusual · 27/02/2014 22:37

WooWoo, I think benefits are based on the assumption that the household all have access to the household income.

TetrisBlock · 27/02/2014 22:40

As I said previously, I wonder how he thought the rent was being paid. Could he reasonably have been expected to know that fraud was being committed?

fideline · 27/02/2014 22:40

"Are you assuming I haven't because i'm male?

She's a thief and was caught."

No. I had been wondering if you were coming from the "I was a skint single mother/carer and i never..." angle.

The revelation you were male meant that you'd never been a single mother, clearly, but nevertheless I wondered...

Floggingmolly · 27/02/2014 22:41

You are raving, Mintyy.
If only he weren't a prize wanker, she wouldn't be facing prison.
She is not facing prison for her choice in men, abysmal though it would appear to be; she's facing prison for fraudulently claiming benefits.
How far would she get using "but he's a prize wanker, m'lud" as her defence?

Mintyy · 27/02/2014 22:44

The extent to which some women on this thread will go to excuse an abusive cocklodger of any blame in this whole sorry scenario is absolutely breathtaking.

WooWooOwl · 27/02/2014 22:47

No one is excusing him for what he dd wrong.

Just saying that he can't be held accountable for a crime that he didn't commit, because you seem to be convinced that he deserves an equal share of the blame for the actual crime, not just the situation.

TetrisBlock · 27/02/2014 22:48

You said above that he did nothing wrong.