To report this as benefit fraud

[ClareClareClareClare]

A relative is claiming benefits, can’t work due to health but is one of those who is always complaining about something wrong with her but is always able to do the things she wants to do. Can holiday abroad, always down the gym, etc. When she was working she was always making complaints against employers- one of life’s victims.

She sold a property a couple of years ago and has squirrelled about £40k away through investments. I think has got her mother to do this for her.

I’m so fed up of seeing people like her take the piss. I 100% support a welfare system and it really pisses me off to see it abused like this. And meanwhile we are working our arses off and not able to afford the foreign travel and gym memberships.

I’m so tempted to report her secret savings to DWP.

Anyway, can you explain how any of my comments were ableist

Certain people on MN always accuse everyone who disagrees with them on topics like this as ableists when they are far from it

I said UC, and possibly PIP.

Stating that going to the gym and going holiday is suspicious behaviour for disabled people, is ableist.

If it isn’t, can you explain why? I’m willing to listen.

And according to your post at 17.34 possible pip..
hence the comments people have made about non means tested benefits.so based on YOUR comment hardly surprising that posters have been taking about pip.

Not all benefits have anything to do with savings, if health is her key issue there will be medical professionals involved and they often aren't income/savings related.

Its also completely ignorant to see people on their best day and just assume thats their absolute baseline.

The higher the benefits go the more they are investigated, multiple people with far more info (like communication with drs, referrals, test results and nurse assessments etc...) than you will have collectively decided what she is entitled to.

Why you think you magically know better than the people with that info is strange.

To be fair if you are on a limited income it is not very wise to be spending money in Costa / Starbucks / Pret

You took a long time to confirm that. Plus you mentioned PIP.

Yes….
DEFINITELY UC
maybe PIP.
The Pip is irrelevant- if she’s claiming the UC fraudulently.

Yes they can and exactly when it was removed from her account. I think the limit on savings to claim benefits it 16k

My partner pays (and we just have tea anyway).
I can go where and spend my money how I want though.
And if OP's relative chooses to do that on holidays and gym, then so be it.

You don’t seem so sure of your facts now? I imagine with regard to fraudulent claims all of the information is relevant, no?

I said no such thing, stop accusing me of being an ableist, you are now trying to twist things to suit yourself

Where did I say ‘that going to the gym and going holiday is suspicious behaviour for disabled people’

that is something that you said

If you had made this clear in your opening post, you might have had a different response. Why did you only decide to mention it once the thread had been going for a couple of hours and after you had made around a couple of dozen previous posts?

Of course you can

Yes.
ther do this when people go in to care and money shifted out to children within the recent years. You can’t just make it disappear to avoid tax/becoming eligible for welfare, etc.

I imagine a few bums on this thread are nipping as they don’t seem to realise it and getting very defensive about it.

Maybe they are worried about someone “jealous little beak” revealing their fraud.

Nope, YOU said the gym was suspicious behaviour.

And you’ve just opined now that people on limited income, as apparently the disabled should and must be, shouldn’t be spending in coffee shops.

Ableism.

In response to being asked what behaviour of the relative is suspicious you responded

“spends a lot of time at the gym
The OP knows her well so would have mentioned if she had some Physical disability
No harm in reporting suspicious behaviour, it can be investigated and if she is actually entitled the all is fine”

I never said that a disabled person going to the gym or on holidays was suspicious behaviour which was what you accused me of saying

No. Because the fraud only applies to the UC.
As you yourself have said multiple times.

She will have just listed it as repaying loads, everything can be excused. I wouldn't bother.

See @BuffetTheDietSlayer post above this one.

This is such a common tactic employed by benefit bashers on MN. Accuse anyone who challenges them of being benefit fraudsters.

So we have moved on from posters condoning benefit fraud to posters are now all on the fiddle themselves.

If you actively argue against reporting fraud like some of the posts on here that’s quite questionable isn’t it?
not so much the people who have really discussed it, but the people who just pop up and say “mind your own business”.

I don’t believe I have made any comment about universal credit…