Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Would you report this? Potential benefit fraud

389 replies

Overthebow · 03/03/2023 09:35

I’m struggling with this one, on one hand I think just leave it as everyone is struggling to survive, on the other it just doesn’t sit right with me. And I’d it even benefit fraud? I don’t have much experience with benefits so not sure. I need your thoughts! here’s the situation.

A couple had a baby a few years ago. Almost straight afterwards they split up.she got a housing association property and universal credit, she doesn’t work. He lives at his mums, has a decently paid job and doesn’t claim UC. But ever since they’ve still appeared to kind of be together. He sleeps over a few times a week, they go on days out and holidays together and she talks about them as ‘we’ and ‘us’. She’s also talked about buying a house together in the future as he is able to save a decent amount.

OP posts:
XenoBitch · 07/03/2023 19:28

ZeldaWillTellYourFortune · 06/03/2023 21:10

They shouldn't be "forced" to live together but they shouldn't be rewarded for NOT living together, if they are otherwise operating as a couple/family unit.

It is not a "reward". The mum is claiming the benefits she is entitled to.

Moxysright · 07/03/2023 19:31

Hoppinggreen · 03/03/2023 09:39

Yep, sounds like fraud to me.
I would judge but not report

Agreed

Crikeyalmighty · 07/03/2023 19:33

@XenoBitch no- I think benefits aren't enough for anyone who is single with no dependent children. The person I mentioned and gave as an example who is doing perfectly ok and could work but actively chooses not to has 2 children, both over5 and also gets very significant amounts of child maintanance - which doesn't affect her benefits at all.

LakieLady · 07/03/2023 19:42

Moonicorn · 06/03/2023 16:40

100%. Why is it okay only for benefits claimants to be selfish and look after number 1 at everyone else’s expense, yet somebody who actually works full time and pays tax does something - let’s say doesn’t declare a cash in hand job - and they’re suddenly a greedy fat cat desperate for everyone else to starve?

In this instance, it is ok because they are not doing anything illegal, unlike the person not declaring their earnings accurately to HMRC.

LakieLady · 07/03/2023 19:47

blueskylie · 06/03/2023 23:08

-There is a difference between earned money, and money other people have earned that is taken from them to give to people who haven’t earned it.

But that's exactly what i'm talking about. Hearing about this tory peer who just got awarded £300k levelling up grant to fix the potholes on his private driveway - that's not what levelling up was intended for and it's some millionaire taking money off the taxpayer. He didn't earn that money.

And Rishi is PM. It did not damage his chances.

Was that in East Sussex, approx a year ago?

If not, there are two of them at it!

LakieLady · 07/03/2023 20:02

Moonicorn · 06/03/2023 16:03

Of course I do, call me Jacob Rees Mogg 🙄

Not.

But in PP’s previous scenario, why should she get UC on top of a generous CMS payment? Those of us just over the UC limit aren’t given any handouts for our kids. Why do you want our kids to starve?

Because CMS payments can't be relied on, and it gives an unscrupulous man another way to abuse the mother of his children.

My "D"SS halved the amount of maintenance he gives the mother of his child without any warning. She was utterly in the shit, or would have been if I hadn't been in a position to help her out.

THisbackwithavengeance · 07/03/2023 20:40

This is exactly why men get away with being cocklodgers and why being a cocklodger is so normalised and commonplace now.

They don't have to pay for their children because the taxpayer will. The women allow it because they are greedy as well and like the idea of having free money as well as contributions from their man.

However the man isn't invested. He's not really living there and he feels no legal or moral obligation to feed, house or look after his kids or indeed any loyalty to his DP. He's not really part of the family after all; he just turns up when he wants a shag. He doesn't have to pay for anything much; he gets to spend his money on himself so he's happy. But the first sign of trouble or the minute his head is turned by a sniff of an OW, he's off.

Judging by attitudes on the thread, we have only ourselves to blame, ladies. We tolerated it and encouraged it. We reap what we sow.

woodhill · 07/03/2023 20:54

Yes exactly that and it gives people license to do as they please and almost infantilises them as they are not earning the money

XenoBitch · 07/03/2023 20:57

woodhill · 07/03/2023 20:54

Yes exactly that and it gives people license to do as they please and almost infantilises them as they are not earning the money

Vile comment. I hope you never find yourself having to claim benefits.

woodhill · 07/03/2023 21:20

So do I but I meant in the context of the last post

I understand your situation is different

blueskylie · 07/03/2023 22:17

Of course he didn’t. But that’s plain whataboutery isn’t it?

Not at all. I'm pointing out that it's not poor people on benefits being 'given all the money taken off the taxpayers'. Plenty of examples over the last few years where very rich people have handed billions in public money and the public have not benefited from it.

ZeldaWillTellYourFortune · 07/03/2023 23:48

THisbackwithavengeance · 07/03/2023 20:40

This is exactly why men get away with being cocklodgers and why being a cocklodger is so normalised and commonplace now.

They don't have to pay for their children because the taxpayer will. The women allow it because they are greedy as well and like the idea of having free money as well as contributions from their man.

However the man isn't invested. He's not really living there and he feels no legal or moral obligation to feed, house or look after his kids or indeed any loyalty to his DP. He's not really part of the family after all; he just turns up when he wants a shag. He doesn't have to pay for anything much; he gets to spend his money on himself so he's happy. But the first sign of trouble or the minute his head is turned by a sniff of an OW, he's off.

Judging by attitudes on the thread, we have only ourselves to blame, ladies. We tolerated it and encouraged it. We reap what we sow.

Extremely well said!!!

XenoBitch · 07/03/2023 23:53

ZeldaWillTellYourFortune · 07/03/2023 23:48

Extremely well said!!!

I have a male friend who would be classed as a "cocklodger". He is unable to work, and is very disabled. He pays what he can for his non resident kids.
Still, MN assumes any non resident dad is a dead beat.

Seymour5 · 08/03/2023 07:21

XenoBitch · 07/03/2023 23:53

I have a male friend who would be classed as a "cocklodger". He is unable to work, and is very disabled. He pays what he can for his non resident kids.
Still, MN assumes any non resident dad is a dead beat.

Absolutely not. He has a genuine reason for inability to work, people like your friend need, and should get adequate help. I hope he has a supportive partner, and/or family, on his own I can imagine its a struggle.

But people must be living in a bubble if they can’t see the difference between your friend, and those who see some dubious claim of ill health as a way not to work.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page