chem1st Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2011999/Deported-Nigerian-man-131-aliases-crept-Britain-carry-1m-fraud.html Using multiple identites this guy managed to be both the tenant and the landlord of a property. Housing benefit funded. He claimed the money as tenant to pay for a roof over his head. And as a landlord to finance the purchase of the property. Why not give people the right to buy/build their own home (using housing benefit). This guy was effectively doing that. The long term disabled for example will be claiming for life and it would make more sense for their housing benefit claim to be given in a lump sum to fund the construction of a property, rather than have them housed in the private sector at great expense to the state over that persons lifetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 Because if that's to be done then it allows them to accrue a large benefit to themselves out of the pockets of those who are working and are funding them. That's unreasonable. Now if that was used to provide a house that was passed on to someone else when the original person no longer required it then we'd have a winner. I think it's called social housing - aka the council house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the chazter Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2011999/Deported-Nigerian-man-131-aliases-crept-Britain-carry-1m-fraud.html Using multiple identites this guy managed to be both the tenant and the landlord of a property. Housing benefit funded. He claimed the money as tenant to pay for a roof over his head. And as a landlord to finance the purchase of the property. Why not give people the right to buy/build their own home (using housing benefit). This guy was effectively doing that. The long term disabled for example will be claiming for life and it would make more sense for their housing benefit claim to be given in a lump sum to fund the construction of a property, rather than have them housed in the private sector at great expense to the state over that persons lifetime. I agree in part that for long term disabled . but i wouldnt like to think that my hard earned tax etc was funding the glass back brigade . there are many people that are working & saving to get a deposit so as to get a step on the property ladder . there are people who cant help been out of work. Then there is the tribe that stand banging on pub doors at 11am 7 days a week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 Wow! A sensible idea from the Daily Fail? I somehow doubt it'll ever happen though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 The long term disabled for example will be claiming for life and it would make more sense for their housing benefit claim to be given in a lump sum to fund the construction of a property, rather than have them housed in the private sector at great expense to the state over that persons lifetime. Why not build social housing instead so that the ownership remains with the state? The reason why not is that finding 100*monthly housing benefit (is that a fair estimate for the cost to build) isn't possible. Where do you think the money is supposed to come from? Maybe if we all pay 10 years tax in advance then the government could spend it in a lump sum as you suggest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2011999/Deported-Nigerian-man-131-aliases-crept-Britain-carry-1m-fraud.html Using multiple identites this guy managed to be both the tenant and the landlord of a property. Housing benefit funded. He claimed the money as tenant to pay for a roof over his head. And as a landlord to finance the purchase of the property. Why not give people the right to buy/build their own home (using housing benefit). This guy was effectively doing that. The long term disabled for example will be claiming for life and it would make more sense for their housing benefit claim to be given in a lump sum to fund the construction of a property, rather than have them housed in the private sector at great expense to the state over that persons lifetime. Isn't that called subletting and illegal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 I think it's also called benefit fraud and probably tax evasion, and also illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianthedog Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 Wow! A sensible idea from the Daily Fail? I somehow doubt it'll ever happen though Apart from it's not sensible - it's just giving away assets to scroungers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Gobby Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 Apart from it's not sensible - it's just giving away assets to scroungers. And scrounge they will ( Oh!! I'm on disability /whatever).I can't work, but i can manage to build a house as long as it's free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.