Hazel Blears has just written a cheque

[3littlefrogs]

for £13,000 to the inland revenue.

Am I alone in being absolutely staggered that she has enough cash to do that???

That is more than a year's pay for me!!!!

I still don't understand why the police aren't knocking on doors about this. If it'd been any of us peasants we'd've been hauled in by now

because all the claims were approved

it's the system that's at fault, they are milking it lawfully certainly not morally

She really is a twat

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should, though. You still have full moral responsibility for your actions. It's like those spivs in the City trying to blame the regulator as if it's not their fault at all...

No point in writing it out to the Inland Revenue - it's not called that any more! It's HMRC now...

(sorry, clicked 'post' too soon)..which means they wouldn't accept it anyway! Photo-opportunity, anyone?

i though the capital gains tax she fiddled her way out of was for £18k?

So can all benefit fraudsters just hand over cheques to the DWP and not be prosecuted for their fraud then?

It is jsut staggering that this bunch of corrupt bastards can get away with this. I really really hope some of them end up in prison, because the fact that it was "within the rules" is neither here nor there, it's perfectly clear that the rules were drawn up as a means to defraud the public purse. Anyone who has had a hand in drawing up the rules should be prosecuted.

Of course she can afford to pay a cheque for £13k. She's obviously not been spending any of her actual wages has she?

I can't see how claiming for a mortgage that has already been paid off is playing within the rules. Even in their lax, made up, gravy train set up. Police should be involved.

Certainly claiming for a mortgage that didn't exist sounds like fraud to me. Not that I'm a lawyer but still.

Agree with everyone that said HMRC won't be able to cash it (or will just immeditely credit her account anyway).

I'm also remembering the minister who said a couple of months ago re clawing back Fred Goodwins pension that "it may stand up in a court of law but it doesn't stand up in the court of public opinion". They didn't remember that gem when they were all saying it was within the rules did they!!

I don't think any of the more outrageous claims were within the rules anyway - because the rules state that above all any claims made have to be solely to enable the member to do the job AND morally justfiable (that's the jist anyway, I've been avoiding revision by reading the Green Book this afternoon!)

I don't see how moat cleaning, gardening or even a cleaner should be claimed - I used to work way longer hours than an mp and my house descended into real shit tip (I even on one occaision had to buy a new suit for a meeting because I hadn't had time to do washing.). My employer never paid for a cleaner for me.