Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to think you can't claim to be homeless living in an airport if your income is £1400 a month

444 replies

dhdjdbrjrkbr · 07/02/2015 11:15

Strange DM story today, nothing adds up

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2943251/Homeless-Heathrow-look-holiday-truth-middle-class-couple-living-airport-losing-500-000-home.html#article-2943251

OP posts:
MadameJulienBaptiste · 08/02/2015 17:08

This is so bizarre I am gripped!

noddyholder · 08/02/2015 17:27

All these kind strangers prepared to house the homeless eh?

NimpyWWindowmash · 08/02/2015 17:29

Their picture has been taken down from tripadvisor.

Maybe they used to run a B&B before they went bust?

expatinscotland · 08/02/2015 17:29

And give the press their names and locations. Free lodging, so they don't need £10k.

hifi · 08/02/2015 18:51

The Dax in NYC page are asking for donations straight to Ronald Mcdonald house. They are fame hungry grabbers.

HairyPotter · 08/02/2015 20:22

Oh the irony of the Dax page complaining about people using their photos after they pimped their ds out to everyone to beg for cash.

RonnieRat · 08/02/2015 20:53

Someone on Twitter says they stayed at Heathrow Cottages and it's Alan and Katrina who own/run it.

@loosewomen @ITV they own Heathrow Cottages - I've stayed there! #Scam #Scandal

They've denied in the DM that they run a B&B Confused

LovestFromest · 08/02/2015 21:18

My personal opinion - and I am treading very carefully here to avoid saying anything that might cross a legal line - is this:

Publications which make a lot of money out of clicks might be considered to have a vested interest in whipping up scam-type stories and not putting them to rest as soon as possible. The more outrage, the more eyeballs they get from people who might not normally visit their site multiple times a day.

Likewise certain programmes stand to benefit more from outrage than from exposing the truth asap.

Again, I stress that I am not suggesting that any of the parties involved are knowingly doing anything wrong. I'm just saying that I can see potential financial benefits, and more tangible advantages than simply pushing a benefits-bashing agenda or what have you.

RonnieRat · 08/02/2015 21:28

Yup. It's called clickbait.

expatinscotland · 08/02/2015 21:32

Action Fraud has been notified. The whole 'story' was full of holes. People who worked in Heathrow said it was not open 24 hours a day. The photo of 'their' former home in Dorset, complete with cars in front, not on, despite the license plates being pixilated out.

The original article also states that they returned from living in Canada in 2013, where he has two adult daughters, and that Katrina was looking for live-in work but had turned down work so as not to be parted from Alan. Also that she never signed on because they were 'not au fait' with the benefits system, yet had the intelligence to contact 'hundreds' of housing associations and almshouses. Guess they had never heard of debt management charities, either. Hmm I've been in a load of housing association offices, the walls in every one are full of leaflets about housing, debt, money management and assistance with money problems, the benefits system, even health woes.

LovestFromest · 08/02/2015 22:04

RonnieRat something like the Samantha Brick story comes under the heading of clickbait. If you were to deliberately allow people to donate to a cause while knowing that it was all nonsense and knowing that a large number of readers knew it too and that that was in fact the reason they were getting so worked up about it, that would be fraud.

LovestFromest · 08/02/2015 22:11

Samantha Brick clickbait gets everyone talking and makes money for those involved. No real harm done.

A story which then attracts a GoFundMe campaign and lots of questions about its authenticity, which are not properly addressed = fraud. The publication is then complicit as they stand to gain.financially from dragging out the controversy for as.long.as possible. Harm is done to those who handed over their money in good faith, not knowing that the whole story was nonsense.

RonnieRat · 08/02/2015 23:26

I'm not saying it isn't fraud. But its definitely clickbait. DM online are experts in it.

LovestFromest · 09/02/2015 06:23

Oh for sure. That goes without saying Smile

Crumblevision · 09/02/2015 08:43

Can't see their page on Go Fund Me now - odd Hmm

JoanHickson · 09/02/2015 09:01

The Dax lot took the press along for the journey home. Clicking on the DM article must be high.

limitedperiodonly · 09/02/2015 09:27

There are people who live at Heathrow.

They're just not Daily Mail types.

The chief executive of the airport sounds like a compassionate man dealing with a difficult problem.

I guess that story inspired the Mail piece.

bloomingMargaret · 09/02/2015 09:29

Oh no I donated 10 pounds to this couple. Have I been taken in by trolls?!

Does anyone know how to claim a refund?

stubbornstains · 09/02/2015 10:54

That doesn't surprise me at all limited. And now these homeless people trying to stay under the radar will have the full light of publicity shone on them thanks to this story. That's what makes me really angry about it.

DoraGora · 09/02/2015 10:59

limited good link. Has the DM printed an apology for this yet? Certainly detracts from the real homeless in London generally.blooming write and ask the editor at the paper to give you your tenner back.

misdee · 09/02/2015 11:24

The picture of Alan lane has gone from the janaschilder page

OnceUponATimeAgain · 09/02/2015 12:23

Were they on Loose Women this morning? Am at work so no TV, and cant see any mention of them on LW facebook??

Toughasoldboots · 09/02/2015 12:26

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

limitedperiodonly · 09/02/2015 12:33

stubbornstains They might be all right. I hope so. The two men pictured gave longer interviews that were in the paper but not on the website. I doubt they'd do that if they were scared.

It sounded like Security was turning a blind eye because they were no trouble. They didn't sound like a security risk. I think the biggest headache at Heathrow are thieves, so it might even be helpful to have a few trustworthy people around as extra eyes.

The Portuguese man recently lost his job in a hotel restaurant and the other man, who's from somewhere in eastern Europe that I forget, is a building labourer who's hoping work will pick up as the weather improves. They're both watching every penny and doing the odd bit of work when they can get it and both said they were showered and shaved and out of the airport by about 6am.

I don't think the Standard article will have loads of extra people flocking to the airport. If I was in that situation it would occur to me to go there too.

Like the chief executive said, the airport is safe and warm and you can wash and eat there. His comments really surprised and cheered me - though if he does get an influx he will obviously have to review the situation. He's not running a hostel but he doesn't sound like the sort of person who wants to kick someone out into the cold either.

DoraGora newspapers would throw someone under a bus before apologising or acknowledging mistakes. Sadly, bloomin's tenner is long gone.