casual working while claiming disablement benefit

21 Jul 2008

Quote by kentswingers777
It makes me laugh when I hear people say its ok to do the odd job. :shock: No it is not.

Well it may not be okay by you but it is okay with the DWP, so long as you stay within their limits. Perhaps you should avail them of your opinion on the matter?
Also if you are being dealt with organisations like Stepping Stones you are allowed to do some work without it affecting your benefits.

21 Jul 2008

Quote by Peanut

It makes me laugh when I hear people say its ok to do the odd job. :shock: No it is not.

Well it may not be okay by you but it is okay with the DWP, so long as you stay within their limits. Perhaps you should avail them of your opinion on the matter?
Also if you are being dealt with organisations like Stepping Stones you are allowed to do some work without it affecting your benefits.
Yeah and how many stay within the limits eh?
The whole point of this benefit being scrapped and people being re-assessed is that there are way too many people scrounging off the system, that could and should be in work. As I have already said, if a blind man can take two trains and a bus to work then most could work!!

21 Jul 2008

makes our blood boil, our eldest that is off to college can claim bugger all as we earn an X amount, had we not have gone onto further education and 'bettered' ourselves we might be fecking better off!

21 Jul 2008

Quote by kentswingers777

It makes me laugh when I hear people say its ok to do the odd job. :shock: No it is not.

Well it may not be okay by you but it is okay with the DWP, so long as you stay within their limits. Perhaps you should avail them of your opinion on the matter?
Also if you are being dealt with organisations like Stepping Stones you are allowed to do some work without it affecting your benefits.
Yeah and how many stay within the limits eh?
The whole point of this benefit being scrapped and people being re-assessed is that there are way too many people scrounging off the system, that could and should be in work. As I have already said, if a blind man can take two trains and a bus to work then most could work!!
A blind man is disabled, he isn't ill. There's a difference. Incapacity is for people with long term sickness not disabilities. DLA is for that, which incidentally your beloved blind man will also be on as well as the income he is earning at the work he has to catch two trains and a bus to.
So your point is what? It's okay to receive benefit if you work so long as you use public transport?

21 Jul 2008

Quote by nylonsnheels
makes our blood boil, our eldest that is off to college can claim bugger all as we earn an X amount, had we not have gone onto further education and 'bettered' ourselves we might be fecking better off!

Highly unlikely.
Currently I have the skills to be earning 45k a year, but I'm bleeding the state for 7k pa (which includes a small pension). Which do you think I'd rather be earning?
I'd like to see how well you'll do on that amount. Unless of course you think that much would make you better off.

21 Jul 2008

no body is going to persue the 'burning' route then?
lp

21 Jul 2008

Quote by __random_orbit__
no body is going to persue the 'burning' route then?
lp

Sorry, I can't afford the matches.

21 Jul 2008

Quote by Peanut
no body is going to persue the 'burning' route then?
lp

Sorry, I can't afford the matches.
a few hours onsite, cash in hand, get you all the matches you like
hush hush like
lp

21 Jul 2008

Quote by __random_orbit__
no body is going to persue the 'burning' route then?
lp

Sorry, I can't afford the matches.
a few hours onsite, cash in hand, get you all the matches you like
hush hush like
lp
This from the guy who's spent the last few weeks protesting that he's not a pyromaniac. rolleyes

21 Jul 2008

Quote by __random_orbit__
no body is going to persue the 'burning' route then?
lp

Sorry, I can't afford the matches.
a few hours onsite, cash in hand, get you all the matches you like
hush hush like
lp
Only if you have the ones with the really nice smell when they ignite.
I think I'm starting a new fetish, hmmmm, goes looking for the Swan Vesta.

22 Jul 2008

Quote by Peanut

It makes me laugh when I hear people say its ok to do the odd job. :shock: No it is not.

Well it may not be okay by you but it is okay with the DWP, so long as you stay within their limits. Perhaps you should avail them of your opinion on the matter?
Also if you are being dealt with organisations like Stepping Stones you are allowed to do some work without it affecting your benefits.
Yeah and how many stay within the limits eh?
The whole point of this benefit being scrapped and people being re-assessed is that there are way too many people scrounging off the system, that could and should be in work. As I have already said, if a blind man can take two trains and a bus to work then most could work!!
A blind man is disabled, he isn't ill. There's a difference. Incapacity is for people with long term sickness not disabilities. DLA is for that, which incidentally your beloved blind man will also be on as well as the income he is earning at the work he has to catch two trains and a bus to.
So your point is what? It's okay to receive benefit if you work so long as you use public transport?
You know exactly what I am saying. My point as you well know is if this guy can get to work, then so can a lot of the other scroungers out there!
We all saw that programme on the telly and it is widespread that kind of abuse. All those on this kind of benefit will all soon be tested...let's see how many are fit for work. I cannot wait to see the numbers drop, but hope that the genuine people out there who NEED this benefit get a little more, from all the millions they will save. But doubt that somehow!
As for my " beloved " blind man...what was that comment all about? I take my hat off to him as so should anyone else!! cool

Or don't you think he should be praised, and just sign up to the benefit system like he so easily could? I am amazed at that comment to be honest, unless I read it wrong of course?

22 Jul 2008

I'm not condoning fraud in any way but there are certain circumstances that I think most of us have never encountered and are fortunate enough to never be in and as such we don't really know every aspect of every scenario.
A very close family friend of ours is a good example of when bending the rules is possibly the better alternative, some people will disagree but I think until you have walked a mile in this persons shoes you should not be so quick to judge or condemn.
Basically a great and very dear friend of ours who had been in a very good and reasonably well paid career for over 21 years was made redundant last year. Now he found it very difficult to find work in his field of employment at the same wage level he had previously been in and could not afford to take much of a wage drop as he has a mortgage, car payments, bills, kids to provide for and was pretty much stretched when he was bringing a wage in every month.
He went to the job centre and they put him on job seekers which he got £60 a week, after paying his taxes for 21 years. He said he was made to feel like it was not his fault and that they understood his position but with £60 a week to pay for bills, food, kids clothing outstanding credit etc he was going to be looking at getting into serious debt.
Now I have known this guy all my life and he is a true gentleman and a lovely person and as honest as the day is long, but needs must an he took a cash in hand job labouring for his wifes brother.
This guy has been to university, been in a managerial position for 16 years and was now working as a labourer on a building site just to make ends meet.
If he had declared the work his mortgage insurance would have ceased and he was not paid enough as a labourer to even pay his mortgage and would have been in serious debt, so he did what he had to do until he found work.
I think if I was ever in his position I would do exactly the same thing as having contributed to "the system" for 21 years as a high tax payer I think it does not put him in the same leagues as those people who cannot be arsed to get off their arses and find work and play "the system" while the rest of us go out and graft to fund their Jeremy Kyle lifestyle!!
RANT OVER wink

22 Jul 2008

Quote by kentswingers777

It makes me laugh when I hear people say its ok to do the odd job. :shock: No it is not.

Well it may not be okay by you but it is okay with the DWP, so long as you stay within their limits. Perhaps you should avail them of your opinion on the matter?
Also if you are being dealt with organisations like Stepping Stones you are allowed to do some work without it affecting your benefits.
Yeah and how many stay within the limits eh?
The whole point of this benefit being scrapped and people being re-assessed is that there are way too many people scrounging off the system, that could and should be in work. As I have already said, if a blind man can take two trains and a bus to work then most could work!!
A blind man is disabled, he isn't ill. There's a difference. Incapacity is for people with long term sickness not disabilities. DLA is for that, which incidentally your beloved blind man will also be on as well as the income he is earning at the work he has to catch two trains and a bus to.
So your point is what? It's okay to receive benefit if you work so long as you use public transport?
You know exactly what I am saying. My point as you well know is if this guy can get to work, then so can a lot of the other scroungers out there!

Since when is getting to work an indicator of one's ability to work?

We all saw that programme on the telly and it is widespread that kind of abuse.

Actually, no I didn't see the program. I rarely if ever watch broadcast TV.

All those on this kind of benefit will all soon be tested...let's see how many are fit for work.

And herein lies the problem. Certainly one that people without health problems never realise.
Do you know how demeaning it is to have to go through all that shite?
Someone on long-term sick (a genuine sufferer) not only has to contend with feeling like shit all the time, having bugger all money, having a crap quality of life they then have to go through all sorts of additional medical exams from people who look at them as if they are trying to screw the system. Then at the end of the day they get people like you automatically assuming that they are scroungers and lowlifes.
I take it you've never been through any of these "tests". I can assure you that they put you through the ringer whilst all the time making you feel like a turd on their shoes for having the gall to ask for a government handout.

I cannot wait to see the numbers drop, but hope that the genuine people out there who NEED this benefit get a little more, from all the millions they will save. But doubt that somehow!

I'm sure you'll be logged on to a statistics website somewhere rubbing your hands with excitement. But again it seems to be lost on you that the people who NEED the benefit once again have to jump through yet more hoops.

As for my " beloved " blind man...what was that comment all about? I take my hat off to him as so should anyone else!! Or don't you think he should be praised, and just sign up to the benefit system like he so easily could? I am amazed at that comment to be honest, unless I read it wrong of course?

I'm sure the blind man would feel truly patronised for your attention. The point being, which you have either ignored or went over your head, is that the probability is that this guy you want to take your hat off to is receiving benefits and is receiving a working wage.
Sort of destroys your argument really.

22 Jul 2008

Quote by Peanut

It makes me laugh when I hear people say its ok to do the odd job. :shock: No it is not.

Well it may not be okay by you but it is okay with the DWP, so long as you stay within their limits. Perhaps you should avail them of your opinion on the matter?
Also if you are being dealt with organisations like Stepping Stones you are allowed to do some work without it affecting your benefits.
Yeah and how many stay within the limits eh?
The whole point of this benefit being scrapped and people being re-assessed is that there are way too many people scrounging off the system, that could and should be in work. As I have already said, if a blind man can take two trains and a bus to work then most could work!!
A blind man is disabled, he isn't ill. There's a difference. Incapacity is for people with long term sickness not disabilities. DLA is for that, which incidentally your beloved blind man will also be on as well as the income he is earning at the work he has to catch two trains and a bus to.
So your point is what? It's okay to receive benefit if you work so long as you use public transport?
You know exactly what I am saying. My point as you well know is if this guy can get to work, then so can a lot of the other scroungers out there!

Since when is getting to work an indicator of one's ability to work?

We all saw that programme on the telly and it is widespread that kind of abuse.

Actually, no I didn't see the program. I rarely if ever watch broadcast TV.

All those on this kind of benefit will all soon be tested...let's see how many are fit for work.

And herein lies the problem. Certainly one that people without health problems never realise.
Do you know how demeaning it is to have to go through all that shite?
Someone on long-term sick (a genuine sufferer) not only has to contend with feeling like shit all the time, having bugger all money, having a crap quality of life they then have to go through all sorts of additional medical exams from people who look at them as if they are trying to screw the system. Then at the end of the day they get people like you automatically assuming that they are scroungers and lowlifes.
I take it you've never been through any of these "tests". I can assure you that they put you through the ringer whilst all the time making you feel like a turd on their shoes for having the gall to ask for a government handout.

I cannot wait to see the numbers drop, but hope that the genuine people out there who NEED this benefit get a little more, from all the millions they will save. But doubt that somehow!

I'm sure you'll be logged on to a statistics website somewhere rubbing your hands with excitement. But again it seems to be lost on you that the people who NEED the benefit once again have to jump through yet more hoops.

As for my " beloved " blind man...what was that comment all about? I take my hat off to him as so should anyone else!! Or don't you think he should be praised, and just sign up to the benefit system like he so easily could? I am amazed at that comment to be honest, unless I read it wrong of course?

I'm sure the blind man would feel truly patronised for your attention. The point being, which you have either ignored or went over your head, is that the probability is that this guy you want to take your hat off to is receiving benefits and is receiving a working wage.
Sort of destroys your argument really.
Get over yourself.
You seem to take great delight in trying to belittle people that don't agree with your views. You know for sure this guy is taking any form of benefit? Maybe I should contact the radio station and ask!
You seem to have a personel axe to grind on here with anyone that opposes your views. Your comment about my " beloved " blind man, is a comment that most people can see through, and it shows the kind of person that person is.
I think people are sick and tired of the spongers out there who can work. Even if someobne has a dodgy leg they could still answer a phone. The people who seem to be shouting about the overhaul in this benefit may just be the ones who have something to lose?
When did I EVER say I looked at people as lowlifes or scroungers? Yes we all know some are but I was certainly NOT insinuating that everyone on this benefit is either a scrounger or a lowlife. Only the ones who are cheating the system are. Read my replies properly! I said to give the people who deserved this benefit MORE money. Does that still not make sense to you?

22 Jul 2008

Quote by kentswingers777
Get over yourself.

perhaps the same could be said for you and your inviolate opinions.

You seem to take great delight in trying to belittle people that don't agree with your views. You know for sure this guy is taking any form of benefit? Maybe I should contact the radio station and ask!

If you read what I wrote you will see that I said there's a "probability" that he is, because if he's blind he is entitled to claim Disability Living Allowance.
If you feel the need to phone the radio station you certainly don't need my permission.

You seem to have a personel axe to grind on here with anyone that opposes your views. Your comment about my " beloved " blind man, is a comment that most people can see through, and it shows the kind of person that person is.

I used the term "beloved" as you'd used the blind guy as an example a couple of times. There was nothing else implied by its use.
I don't have an axe to grind whether I agree with their views or not. The whole idea of debate is to push your own ideas and point out holes in the other debater's comments. Based on how you always seem to use this chestnut as an argument whenever anyone shoots holes in your posts I can only presume that you are the one taking it as a personal affront that someone should actually disagree with you and your sacrosanct opinions.
Now let's get this clear, I don't have a problem with your or anyone else having opinions that differ from my own, but when those opinions are based on erroneous thinking or information, and then they bring those into public fora then they are fair game for correcting and/or debating. You seem to think a forum is a soapbox where you can wax lyrical about your own opinions unopposed. That isn't the case. If you want to promulgate your opinions without fear of rebuke then perhaps you should write a webpage with no facility for others to respond.

I think people are sick and tired of the spongers out there who can work. Even if someobne has a dodgy leg they could still answer a phone. The people who seem to be shouting about the overhaul in this benefit may just be the ones who have something to lose?

Incapacity is a sickness related benefit and should therefore be based on independent medical opinion, not on the input of a doctor who doesn't know you from Adam, is paid by the DWP and is there to protect their interests not yours. This is why these tests are flawed and unfair.
Don't get me wrong, I totally agree with you that the people claiming the benefit who aren't entitled and are capable of proper full time work should be removed from the system, but there are better ways of doing it than making sick people jump through hoops. I'd rather that a few scroungers get through the system than making further difficulties for people who already have a shite deal in life.

When did I EVER say I looked at people as lowlifes or scroungers? Yes we all know some are but I was certainly NOT insinuating that everyone on this benefit is either a scrounger or a lowlife. Only the ones who are cheating the system are. Read my replies properly! I said to give the people who deserved this benefit MORE money. Does that still not make sense to you?

The way you have spoken about them in this thread demonstrates quite admirably the way you think of people on benefits. Not once have you given any public thought to what effect these changes to the system will have on the genuine claimants. You have only been interested in saving a few quid. Incidentally the savings they reckon can be made are inconsequential compared to the savings that could be made in cutting back the defence budget. It pales into insignificance compared to what has already been spent on the Iraq war.
There is far more money wasted on other things that could be saved without having to inconvenience already sick people.

22 Jul 2008

Quote by Peanut
Get over yourself.

perhaps the same could be said for you and your inviolate opinions.

You seem to take great delight in trying to belittle people that don't agree with your views. You know for sure this guy is taking any form of benefit? Maybe I should contact the radio station and ask!

If you read what I wrote you will see that I said there's a "probability" that he is, because if he's blind he is entitled to claim Disability Living Allowance.
If you feel the need to phone the radio station you certainly don't need my permission.

You seem to have a personel axe to grind on here with anyone that opposes your views. Your comment about my " beloved " blind man, is a comment that most people can see through, and it shows the kind of person that person is.

I used the term "beloved" as you'd used the blind guy as an example a couple of times. There was nothing else implied by its use.
I don't have an axe to grind whether I agree with their views or not. The whole idea of debate is to push your own ideas and point out holes in the other debater's comments. Based on how you always seem to use this chestnut as an argument whenever anyone shoots holes in your posts I can only presume that you are the one taking it as a personal affront that someone should actually disagree with you and your sacrosanct opinions.
Now let's get this clear, I don't have a problem with your or anyone else having opinions that differ from my own, but when those opinions are based on erroneous thinking or information, and then they bring those into public fora then they are fair game for correcting and/or debating. You seem to think a forum is a soapbox where you can wax lyrical about your own opinions unopposed. That isn't the case. If you want to promulgate your opinions without fear of rebuke then perhaps you should write a webpage with no facility for others to respond.

I think people are sick and tired of the spongers out there who can work. Even if someobne has a dodgy leg they could still answer a phone. The people who seem to be shouting about the overhaul in this benefit may just be the ones who have something to lose?

Incapacity is a sickness related benefit and should therefore be based on independent medical opinion, not on the input of a doctor who doesn't know you from Adam, is paid by the DWP and is there to protect their interests not yours. This is why these tests are flawed and unfair.
Don't get me wrong, I totally agree with you that the people claiming the benefit who aren't entitled and are capable of proper full time work should be removed from the system, but there are better ways of doing it than making sick people jump through hoops. I'd rather that a few scroungers get through the system than making further difficulties for people who already have a shite deal in life.

When did I EVER say I looked at people as lowlifes or scroungers? Yes we all know some are but I was certainly NOT insinuating that everyone on this benefit is either a scrounger or a lowlife. Only the ones who are cheating the system are. Read my replies properly! I said to give the people who deserved this benefit MORE money. Does that still not make sense to you?

The way you have spoken about them in this thread demonstrates quite admirably the way you think of people on benefits. Not once have you given any public thought to what effect these changes to the system will have on the genuine claimants. You have only been interested in saving a few quid. Incidentally the savings they reckon can be made are inconsequential compared to the savings that could be made in cutting back the defence budget. It pales into insignificance compared to what has already been spent on the Iraq war.
There is far more money wasted on other things that could be saved without having to inconvenience already sick people.
Will let others on here judge exactly what you meant. I will just let you carry on rambling. lol

22 Jul 2008

Quote by kentswingers777
Will let others on here judge exactly what you meant. I will just let you carry on rambling.

Which in effect means you have no more to back up your position with.

22 Jul 2008

Its gone passed debate and now into farce. Can there ever be an end to the endless bollox quoted then re-quoted? It ain't pretty however clever clever it is. I think you should be sent to bed early without supper.
Any sitters out there want to earn a quid?

22 Jul 2008

Quote by Lost
Its gone passed debate and now into farce. Can there ever be an end to the endless bollox quoted then re-quoted? It ain't pretty however clever clever it is. I think you should be sent to bed early without supper.

If you think that then either you haven't read it properly or just don't give a fuck about the issue. Other than the wholesale slaughter of claimants of course.

Any sitters out there want to earn a quid?

Is it okay if they're on benefit?

22 Jul 2008

I have to say, as the sister of someone with a severe, life threatening, chronic illness, who had had to jump through hoops and be made to feel like a piece of dirt, in order to claim and receive the Incapacity Benefit she needs to live on, I have to say, Peanut, I support your argument all the way through this thread.

22 Jul 2008

Quote by Srne
.... but with £60 a week to pay for bills, food, kids clothing outstanding credit etc he was going to be looking at getting into serious debt.
Now I have known this guy all my life and he is a true gentleman and a lovely person and as honest as the day is long, but needs must an he took a cash in hand job labouring for his wifes brother.

sorry to just snip this part of your thread, but your friend might not be telling you the full story here. The £60 is for HIM and not for his family.
I also do understand what you are saying but try and think of it from the other side. I pay my taxes and my national insurance every month and this goes towards the payment of benefits.
Anyone who is working whilst claiming any kind of benefit are stealling off you and me. Unfortunately benefit theft hasnt had the same stigma as other theft and therefore a lot of people think it is ok.

Quote by Peanut
Well it may not be okay by you but it is okay with the DWP, so long as you stay within their limits. Perhaps you should avail them of your opinion on the matter?

Actually, it isnt DWP who say it is ok, it is Jobcentre Plus which is an executive agency within DWP, and they do have very strict guidelines around the amount of work which can be done. The policies in place at the moment are based around the USA Welfare to Work Policies, but are more lenient and allow some flexibilities.

Quote by Cherrytree
I have to say, as the sister of someone with a severe, life threatening, chronic illness, who had had to jump through hoops and be made to feel like a piece of dirt, in order to claim and receive the Incapacity Benefit she needs to live on, I have to say, Peanut, I support your argument all the way through this thread.

Unfortunately, the genuine ones can be made to feel like this, but this is down to the ones who claim frauduantly, who work and claim benefits and who claim Incapacity Benefit, when they really could go out and do some work. Due to the number of people who fiddle the system, the genuines ones are made to pay.

22 Jul 2008

Quote by Naughty Wigan Couple
snip
Unfortunately, the genuine ones can be made to feel like this, but this is down to the ones who claim frauduantly, who work and claim benefits and who claim Incapacity Benefit, when they really could go out and do some work. Due to the number of people who fiddle the system, the genuines ones are made to pay.

Yep I totally agree.

22 Jul 2008

Quote by Naughty Wigan Couple

Well it may not be okay by you but it is okay with the DWP, so long as you stay within their limits. Perhaps you should avail them of your opinion on the matter?

Actually, it isnt DWP who say it is ok, it is Jobcentre Plus which is an executive agency within DWP, and they do have very strict guidelines around the amount of work which can be done. The policies in place at the moment are based around the USA Welfare to Work Policies, but are more lenient and allow some flexibilities.

I do genuinely like pedantry. I stand corrected but in my defence I was just keeping things simple and brief passionkiss

I have to say, as the sister of someone with a severe, life threatening, chronic illness, who had had to jump through hoops and be made to feel like a piece of dirt, in order to claim and receive the Incapacity Benefit she needs to live on, I have to say, Peanut, I support your argument all the way through this thread.

Unfortunately, the genuine ones can be made to feel like this, but this is down to the ones who claim frauduantly, who work and claim benefits and who claim Incapacity Benefit, when they really could go out and do some work. Due to the number of people who fiddle the system, the genuines ones are made to pay.
This is the point I was trying to make earlier. There's no need to do it that way.
Spongers don't manage to sponge in a vacuum. To get Incap they must have been on sickness benefit for a while (I can't remember the actual time) and must have been getting sicknotes from somewhere. They still need to supply sicknotes for at least 2 years after graduating up to Incap, even then they are still called in for a DWP medical.
So the point is, why isn't the DWP coming down on the doctors who are supplying the sicknotes of the ne'er-do-wells? Why not come at it at the source rather than screwing the genuine claimants and making life hell for them?
A scrounger can only be a scrounger if the GP AND the DWP let them.
There should be an independent medical verification service based on full access to the claimant's medical notes. The fact is that as soon as you walk through the DWP's doors to attend one of the medicals the staff look at you as if you're a potential scrounger. You could be stood there with terminal cancer and still be made to feel guilty for making the claim. There should be no need for a claimant to be called in for a medical until they've been flagged as dodgy after an inspection of their medical notes. The less trauma a genuine claimant goes through the better. It's also more efficient than having every claimant coming through the system.
Part of the problem is the fact that claimants are perceived en masse as being at the beck and call of the powers-that-be and should bend over and take it in the arse every time they feel like it. They behave towards the claimants as if it's a privilege and not a legal right.
There are posters up all over the place in these establishments asking people if they have claimed their full entitlements, yet on the other hand when you do you are treated like the scum of the earth and called scroungers and spongers by Sun readers and their like.
People should come first before a single penny is spent on bullets and tanks etc.

22 Jul 2008

I think making a case using the war and the military is cheap actually.
What you would be better doing is going down the road of how it took an independent Journalist to uncover Tesco's tax swindle that meant billions being stolen from the government. In fact most of the major companies do it and are never investigated. It takes tenacious journalists to make these discoveries and then run the risk of being sued and counter sued.
Those same journalists make easy money by going after the most vulnerable in society.
It is the big companies that are cleaning out the country.
The individuals are not making a dent.
I don't agree with anyone lying or cheating anyone out of anything. I especially disagree with the massive profits that are from our pockets by faceless corporations that go without investigation because there is no-one that can afford the court cases to defend allegations.
The person who is 'fleecing' hundreds of benefits is pin money compared to the tax cheating costing billions by clever accounting and rich companies.
sorry.. off soap box.

22 Jul 2008

Quote by splendid_
The person who is 'fleecing' hundreds of benefits is pin money compared to the tax cheating costing billions by clever accounting and rich companies.

Sorry to only quote this bit as I fully agree with what you have said above, especially around the work of Tesco and the companies it deals with.
However, referring the quote above. Yes the impact of one individual may be pin money, but when you look at the thousands who are doing this and the attitude of some people who think it is ok for their friends/relatives/neighbours etc to do it, you start to get the full scale and realise just how much money is spent on benefit cheats.
The annual figure is not pin money and £2.1 billion was 'stollen' by benefit cheats in 2001 alone. Not pin money, in my way of thinking and that is only years losses.

22 Jul 2008

we shall agree to disagree NWC. Neither of us has the true figures for what the Government is losing through failing to investigate the tax cheating corporations.
I don't agree with or approve of 'benefit cheats' but they are an easy target.

22 Jul 2008

Quote by Naughty Wigan Couple
The annual figure is not pin money and £2.1 billion was 'stollen' by benefit cheats in 2001 alone. Not pin money, in my way of thinking and that is only years losses.

Hmmm, well my question is...
How do they know how much is being 'stolen'?
If they can work out the figure then they must know who is doing it. If they know who is doing it then why don't they stop them?
Or is it more likely that they've picked out a number from a hat as a means to try and get the media riled up?

22 Jul 2008

Quote by splendid_
we shall agree to disagree NWC. Neither of us has the true figures for what the Government is losing through failing to investigate the tax cheating corporations.
I don't agree with or approve of 'benefit cheats' but they are an easy target.

Personally I say burn the lot of them, cheating corporations and benefit cheats wink

(and that was tongue in cheek before anyone burns me), but as you say, no we dont know the true figure and probably never will.

Quote by Peanut
How do they know how much is being 'stolen'?

From some of the reading I have been doing (goodness, I lead an exciting life, reading about things like this), this figure is based on the customers they have 'caught' cheating but as Splendid says above, no one seems to have the true figure and as you say, if they knew how much was being stollen, they could stop it.
Ok, end of my rant :wink:

22 Jul 2008

no burning?? oh gosh. you take away all my pleasures.
As for exciting lives. I am comparing the language used for advertising children's shampoos with the language used for adult's shampoos. I may just drown myself in it.
confused

22 Jul 2008

can I nominate Splendid to spearhead the Revolution?
I'll follow!
lp