To think my husband is wrong for reporting my sister for benefit fraud?

[Rockyhardplace25]

So back story:

My sister is a lot younger than me. There is a 15 year age gap- so I basically raised her as my mother was struggling with an alcohol addiction and wasn’t fit to until she went into rehab when my sister was 9. We have a very, strong close relationship.
Sister has also had her own issues with drugs- but when she found out she was pregnant with my niece 8 years ago, went to rehab and has sorted her life out. To some extent.
She has a much older partner, the gap is nearly 30 years, who she met in her addiction who has also, again to some extent, sorted his life out. In that aspect- I take my hat off to both of them.
This man was married with adult children and got my sister pregnant after a one night stand. He left his wife and moved in with my sister. His “other family” have completely cut him off apart from his eldest child- who, from what I can work out, uses him as a bank.

Me and DH have one child, DD who is now a 11, Children are expensive- there’s no two ways about it. With clothing, school trips, days out etc it does add up. DSIS has a 7 year old and is now pregnant with a second child who we are all very excited about.

DSIS doesn’t work and claims sickness benefits, her partner does. Up until recently we assumed she was reporting his income as part of her claim- but we have found out through a slip of the tounge she isn’t. She isn’t even declaring he lives with her, which he does full time. His bank account, car and other things that could link him back to DSIS house is registered to his son’s address. A son he gives £1500 a month too.

DSIS was brought a house when she turned 18 (we have same mum, different dads) so solely pays the mortgage and a lump of the bills herself topped up by her partner. If he/the kids need anything he will go out and buy it but doesn’t directly contribute to the monthly running of the home. Which has pissed me off if I’m honest.

DH is even more pissed off- feels she is taking the piss, as is he, she is committing fraud and why is it fair we both work our arses off to pay our monthly bills when she’s getting it handed to her on a plate but wouldn’t if she was honest. DH thinks if she does that then her partner will leave her because at the moment he’s pretty much living the life of Riley with no expenses.

Hes admitted to me over the weekend he’s reported her for benefit fraud. I don’t know how I feel- I keep flitting from one thing to the next- but ultimately she is my sister and I am worried she will get into serious shit.

Not making a saving because she hasn't declared it is different to the tax payer having to pay more because she hasn't declared it. The tax payer would never make a saving anyway as he just wouldn't move in- who in their right mind would want to pay the living costs of a women they had known for a few months and a child that isn't theirs?

I meant from DWP’s point of view. They won’t advise the claimant they are being investigated unless/until they are ready to present a case against them. So the first a claimant would know for sure is when they are summoned to DWP offices for interview under caution. But l agree that if OP tells her there are steps she can take to protect herself - not let him stay over, remove his stuff from her home etc.

I think if DP has actually changed his address to that of his son - on things like his driving licence, car registration, bank etc, then there’s not much of a paper trail, but if there’s a mail redirection - especially long standing - that would raise suspicions because you wouldn’t pay for a redirection to your own home. I hope the son is prepared for all of this because if there’s a paper trail to the money he’s being paid, he could potentially be in trouble for not declaring it for tax purposes, or if he’s claiming any benefits himself. See what l mean about throwing up various other issues ? I’ve seen people tie themselves in knots with this kind of thing and one small detail overlooked has been enough to bring it all crashing down.

To be honest, if he’s paying his son £1500 to keep quiet, it may be cheaper for OP to declare him as resident and have him support her instead. It all seems a bit contrived.

It depends where the son lives. If DP is saying he lives with his son in Cornwall but keeps using his bank card daily in Essex it will be obvious when they investigate that he is not living in Cornwall. Fraud investigations are a bit more sophisticated than just looking to see if he comes out the house.

Missing the point again. If she was honest, the tax payer would make a saving because benefit would be stopped - he would be expected to support her because he is resident with her and has an income. Whether or not he would have moved in or not is conjecture. The fact is that he has and there is a fraudulent claim at the expense of the tax payer as a result.

And that’s the point I’ve been making in my previous posts. Surveillance is only part of it. They would be investigating in depth and I’ve seen people tripped up by he smallest of details.

It’s people like your sister screwing the system that make it so there’s a six month wait for me to get any help for my severely disabled baby. I’ve paid into the system and lived an honest life worked since I was 16, but had to give up my job to be his full time carer, we are getting no help and have a mortgage to pay! I’m glad he reported her.

I am not missing the point. I just don't agree. It's not conjecture that he wouldn't have moved in if it meant he had to support her and a child that isn't his. Nobody In their right minds would do that.

OK l give up.

If you husband hadn't reported her, someone else would have found out eventually, particularly as you only found out due to 'a slip of the tongue'. She's making mistakes.
I do t think I personally could have shopped a family member to the DSS, but would have had a quiet word in her ear about how easily she can get found out. X

She did wrong, and he has reported her, it’s her u should be annoyed at.

So she was bought a house but pays the mortgage, how does she pay the mortgage of she doesnt work??

Pays for the mortgage with her munificent benefit handouts no doubt. I expect she has to wheel her cash around in a wheelbarrow, so generous is the system and so easy, apparently, to defraud at will. There may even be enough free cash for her to invest in a buy to let. Just for fun.

It's disturbing to me that so many people are reliant on benefits.

How come she’s claiming sickness benefit yet having a baby?

Because being off work sick is not a contraceptive.

Lol you must be joking but some people actually think this. You don't get help from benefits with a mortgage only rent. And it's 400 a month universal credit for a single person and even less like 315 if under 25 years old.

Yep, and you can only get help with the interest after being on UC for 3 months.. and even then it is just a loan. You have to pay it back.
You get a bigger work allowance if you have no housing costs (what you can earn before you begin to lose UC) but only if you have kids or are in specific groups (not the job seekers one).

Yes you're basically fucked if you have a mortgage and lose your job. Even renting they only pay a certain amount depending on your area but it doesn't usually cover the whole rent so you will have to use some of the job seekers/UC to pay the rest of the rent. Which obviously barely leaves anything.
People have some weird misconceptions.

Anyone doing that is really taking the piss.

There is seemingly no limit to how greedy and irresponsible some of these scroungers are. It’s beyond exasperating.

So people too disabled to work should not be allowed to have kids? That sounds an awful lot like eugenics to me.
I know some disabled couples with children, and they are bloody amazing parents who are bringing their kids up to not be judgemental fucks like some of the people on MN.

I don’t think people incapable of even supporting themselves should be having children, no.

I tend to agree here. If you are too sick to work how are you well enough to raise a child ?

And how are you going to prevent this ?

Depends on the size of the mortgage and the payments. There is no help available on benefits for mortgage payments other than SMI - support for mortgage interest. It’s not benefit, it’s a loan which is repayable. UC supports those paying rent so why is the notion of someone genuinely unable to work receiving a repayable loan to help out so unacceptable ?

So you’re basically calling sick and disabled people irresponsible scroungers and saying that because you’re disabled and can’t work you should be denied the opportunity to have a family. Christ. What has society come to.