Bruno Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Typical wishy washy bleeding liberal nonsense! People with no hands can still claim benefits and would probably claim they were disabled as well. Whereas when was the last time you heard of a dead person going into the jobcentre to sign on? ive heard of a dead canooist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwilders Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Blame the system and not this women. If it weren't so easy to cheat then there would be a lot fewer cheats. Why not instead go after the large multinational companies who use loopholes in the law to avoid paying tax or to pay less tax than they should? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockers666 Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1155942/Dole-cheat-single-mother-given-100-years-pay-70-000-stolen-benefits.html and she is smiling.....this is so not right! this woman is scum, people who are entitled to benefits would get a bigger slice of the pie if it wasn,t for these sort of people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digsy Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 this woman is scum, people who are entitled to benefits would get a bigger slice of the pie if it wasn,t for these sort of people How do you work that one out? They would get the same, until there is a natural increase, I don't believe for a second that money saved from people like this women not doing what they are doing would line the pockets of unemployed at all. Its more likely to get pumped into a few new/old suits. I may not agree with what she has done, but there are others that commit far worse crimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxman Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Blame the system and not this women. If it weren't so easy to cheat then there would be a lot fewer cheats. Why not instead go after the large multinational companies who use loopholes in the law to avoid paying tax or to pay less tax than they should? Wasn't it the case that when some high flying hedge fund managers were being questioned by the Commons select committee it transpired that one of them paid less tax than his cleaner. What a wonderful system Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms Macbeth Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 This is a bad case of fraud, no doubt, but I dont have much regard for the DWP and the benefit system. I have been off work 10 months after cancer surgery- I now recieve £60-50 per week 'Employment Support Allowance'. I am almost 60 years old and will be expected to attend interviews with employment advisors with a view to 'getting me back to work'. Whats the point? Havent I been through enough? Surely there are enough young fit people out there who could do with some help to find work. My last visit to the DWP entailed a medical examination and an assessment of what type of work I would be fit for. What a joke!!! My GP tells me to stop being daft when I mention returning to work. Instead of bothering genuinely sick people the DWP guys should be out there catching fraudsters like our aforementioned 'dole cheat'. Why am I so cynical???? Let me guess. You've contributed for years yet are only entitled to the bare minimum ESA (previously known as Incapacity Benefit). As everything else is means tested I assume that you either have another income or a partner with an income? My OH was off work for about three years due to major health issues. His Incapacity benefit stopped when he eventually recovered, so we had no income other than mine for quite a while. Luckily he found part time work. Now I'm officially retired, but after having a few months off went back to p/t work 18 months ago. I can see more people over retirement age needing to earn money to supplement their pensions in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribe Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Blame the system and not this women. If it weren't so easy to cheat then there would be a lot fewer cheats. Why not instead go after the large multinational companies who use loopholes in the law to avoid paying tax or to pay less tax than they should? She has to take some blame, she's a thief and like all thieves they should be accountable for their crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxman Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 She has to take some blame, she's a thief and like all thieves they should be accountable for their crime. Yes she is a thief and she reaped the benefits of her crimes whilst she was screwing everyone else. Unfortunately for us and everyone else we don't seem to be able to get back off her what she has already spent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonny Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Is there any incentive for people to go out to work these days? Unless you're going to be a banker of course Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyhippy Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Once again, we have an outpouring of hatred on person who has no doubt done wrong. Once again, nobody's looked past the screaming headlines. Might I remind people that the only reason why the other person who would seemingly be complicit in this fraud, namely her former partner, hadn't been prosecuted too, is because he never signed anything with respect to benefits claimed. All he has to say is "I didn't know.", and there's nowt can really be done, as she was claiming as a single woman. It's all good and well wailing about this woman, but what of the person who quite happily lived off the proceeds of the fraud? It seems a little convenient that the partnership broke 'once the prosection was brought'. Living together cases are notorious enough to prove as it is. Had they still been a couple, I'm sure there would have been a custodial sentence. The only reason why there are restrictions is because the law has to allow a 'decency' level. It wouldn't surprise me if these two were now seeing each other on a 'casual basis' right now. She's not the only criminal in this, but the only one who will be called one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.