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

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

OP posts:
Elleherd · 05/03/2024 12:32

NamechangeForthisquestion1 why should pensioners specifically, escape being afraid and worried if surveillance of so many citizens fiances is to be normalized? (that bit's a genuine question)

I'm sure this place is full of comfortably off parents who aren't receiving any benefits, who regularly draw out £20/£30 to hand to old Aunty Marge when they get their kids dropped of to her after school on Thursday.
How else will they detect that Old Aunty Marge is getting more than her pension/ attendance allowance be discovered and removed from her, if they can't trawl through her relatives bank accounts? She's not even paying tax on it!

What about all the now retired hard working tax payer pensioners who aren't being subsidized for looking after their nieces, I'm sure they wont mind if it puts an end to Old Aunty Marge getting something they don't.

This is also why the desire to do away with cash and have every transaction between everyone digital and recorded. It all needs resisting.

ShyMaryEllen · 06/03/2024 23:01

I don't understand how the new policy will catch out someone trying to make Auntie Marge's life a bit less grim, if 'comfortably off parents' (whoever they are) take out cash and hand it over for her to spend on sausages and gin.

Nobody should have their accounts scrutinised. I can sort of understand those on means tested benefits having to show that they qualify, but the State Pension isn't means-tested, so there shouldn't be a need to scrutinise the accounts of pensioners other than those on pension credit. If Child Benefit went back to being Family Allowance and was a tax cut rather than a benefit then parents wouldn't need to be scrutinised either.

It's deliberate. And sinister.

Elleherd · 07/03/2024 01:26

It was an attempt at irony. Just the prospect of the excuses needed to justify ridiculous behavior in looking for 'suspicious' algorithms to use against family members. (Comfortably off - those with enough money to never have rely on anything via the state.)

Disabled people receiving PIP aren't receiving a means tested benefit either, but once they start poking around I can see them using it to justify making them so.

The point of bringing tax breaks under benefits, was deliberate, but those saying so at the time were seen as tin hat wearers.

It is indeed deliberate and sinister, but people are ok with it when told it only affects the poorer end of society and never see how it will affect them.

alonglongshot · 07/03/2024 11:05

Did anyone hear Jeremy Hunt yesterday re child benefit.

' doing so requires significant reform to the tax system including allowing HMRC to collect household-level income '

They are not even trying to hide their intentions.

ShyMaryEllen · 07/03/2024 16:09

Yes, that wasn't lost on me either.

Againsttheflow · 07/03/2024 16:13

alonglongshot · 07/03/2024 11:05

Did anyone hear Jeremy Hunt yesterday re child benefit.

' doing so requires significant reform to the tax system including allowing HMRC to collect household-level income '

They are not even trying to hide their intentions.

So long as it works both ways. That the monitoring picks up those under claiming as well as those over claiming. But it won't.

OnlyOpenMouthToChangeFeet · 07/03/2024 18:50

IClaudine · 04/03/2024 21:39

I can't understand how that can be allowed. I can see how access to bank accounts can be made a requirement receiving benefit, but partners, parents and landlords.

They've stated the automated process will not only check the account you have your benefit paid into, but also any other accounts you have. If for example you have a joint account, this will then mean they'll check all that person's accounts. Anyone you receive payments from, even if small will have their accounts checked. Any payments you make to other individuals, rather than companies, will have their accounts checked.

So it will not only be trawling through all your own finances, but also those of anyone financially linked to you in any way.

When you sign up for UC for example, you accept these terms. But other people clearly do not!

It's obscene, and absolutely everyone should be complaining to the Information Commissioner before this even gets the chance to get off the ground, as it must clearly breach GDPR for innocent people connected to the claimant. They are already able to check accounts of claimants, so there is absolutely zero need for this.

We've all been told not to worry, as the AI used will only flag the possibility of fraud, and would always be double checked by a human. But those of us that have to deal with them know that will just not be the case. Entirely innocent claimants will be having their money stopped on a whim at a moment's notice.

As someone who can quickly die without my disability payment, this terrifies me.

This is absolutely nothing to do with fraud; it's about power and control.

Gloriosaford · 07/03/2024 18:52

barstewards! They will do whatever they think they can get away with😡

ShareTheDuvet · 07/03/2024 18:52

Jonisaysitbest · 04/03/2024 18:25

They will happily chase after "benefit cheats" but do nothing about the many so-called loopholes that enable wealthier people and companies to avoid paying tax.
It's so disgusting. Always ready to kick the poorest, take away from the poorest and reward the richest. Please God we get a new bunch of people at the helm after the next election.

This is the crux of it all isn’t it? The rich get away with paying little to no tax and cost the Chancellor billions yet once again we kick the little guy 🤬

Tiptoptum · 07/03/2024 19:07

Actually, posters saying they can see why benefit claimants need their accounts checked are not being reasonable.

I work, I work bloody hard, but because of the benefits system my employer doesn’t pay me a very good wage, knowing that makes up the shortfall. I need to earn about 10k more to get myself off them.

Just because I have to claim why is the general line that you need checking in case you are sitting on £££? UC is demeaning enough, if I had loads in savings I would not be on it.

I do not like the thought of anyone, human or AI trawling through my incomings and outgoings, because it’s the thin edge of the wedge, next they will start looking at spending and decide if you are spending in a frivolous way.

Everyone, even claimants deserve some privacy.

BMW6 · 07/03/2024 19:07

Jonisaysitbest · 04/03/2024 18:25

They will happily chase after "benefit cheats" but do nothing about the many so-called loopholes that enable wealthier people and companies to avoid paying tax.
It's so disgusting. Always ready to kick the poorest, take away from the poorest and reward the richest. Please God we get a new bunch of people at the helm after the next election.

Tax Avoidance isn't a "loophole".

For example
Having ISA'S is Tax Avoidance.
Paying into a Pension Plan is Tax Avoidance.

These, and others, are entirely legal means to effectively manage your money and reduce your tax bill.

Tax Evasion is a different kettle of fish. It's illegal and gets investigated and prosecuted all the time.

Benefits Cheats are just that - Cheats. Liars. Just like people who Evade Tax. They are not using legal means to manage their money. They are simply lying to get money to which they are not entitled.

If you think any Government is ever going to turn a blind eye to any Benefit Cheats you are going to be bitterly disappointed.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page