Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I was amused/bemused to read Southwark tops the list in terms of caseload when it comes to benefit claimants. I also just read how Lambeth is piloting voice software that can flag when someone may be telling a fib, and thus demand a higher threshold of documentation/proof for claims.


So with so many of you out there, I thought I would offer a stage. Are you on benefit? What type? Do you feel it is enough for given your circumstances? Do you believe there is too much fraud?


I'm anxiously await replies, tissue in hand to dab off the spit.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/1745-are-you-on-benefit/
Share on other sites

I am on benefit.


Or rather my kids are. We get child benefit. I think it's too much as we don't spend it but rather pay it directly into their savings accounts.


Not sure what you mean by 'too much fraud'. Do you mean so much that the benefit should be stopped and the innocent should suffer. If so then there is definitely not too much fraud. I think benefit fraud is massively overreported and miniscule in comparison to tax evasion.


Tax evasion is much less taboo than benefit fraud though. That seems unfair to me.

The National Audit Ofice consistently refuse to sign off the accounts of the DWP because they simply don't know how much they lose to fraud. If you include under 'fraud' anybody receiving more than their strict legal entitlement, it is a truly massive sum. Tax credits are a similar scenario, with the added glitch that the way the system is designed means that millions are overpaid every year with little prospect of reclaiming more than a small proportion of it. The willingness of doctors to provided certificates to anyone who asks for them has led to a huge rise in the number of people receiving benefit on the basis that they are unfit to work, although there is little other evidence to suggest that there genuinely is a health crisis amongst the working population.


It's a mess.

We've all seen the episode of Wife Swap where the chinless wonder woman and her limp husband trade with Lizzy 'The Beard' Bardsley - and Mrs Chinless sees how much benefit they get and is outraged, yeah? DOLE SCUM!


Well there are a few headlinetastic cases of Ms Wotsit and her 18 kids who get get a four bedroomed house for nowt and ?60k a year in her back skyrocket. But they live like shit and if you think they're 'appy, think again.


As for me, I was on 'income support' which worked out to around ?33/week. I tried spending it all on booze, drugs, fags, gambling and a big TV (like the papers tell us THEY do) - but (surprise!) I found that with food, clothes, travel, electricity, gas etc etc etc to account for as well - it didn't really stretch too far.

DaveR Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If

> you include under 'fraud' anybody receiving more

> than their strict legal entitlement, it is a truly

> massive sum.


You don't - that's bad admin not fraud.


I agree that some elements of the benefit system should be simplified but calling the problem benefit fraud blames the recipients rather than the providers of the benefit. That's not fair.

Come on Mo don't do a hit and run...


*Bob* made the very good point (which rarely gets any coverage in the meeja) - at least counter it - that it just isn't the norm for people to be living the life of reilly on benefit. Or anything like it


(for benefit see also minimum wage)

Maurice Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Though I would suspect tax evaders re-invest keeping the economy

> more bouyant and the 'pyramid' more robust.


That's alright then.


I signed on for a few months once when I was (surprise surprise) living in Liverpool... Only did it for acceptance and street cred you understand.


I think more money is wasted giving all the teenagers free bus passes. Make them walk so I don't have to listen to their mobile phone music!!!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • There will always be kids pushing the envelope as the saying goes, but having some boundaries should help most understand what they can and cannot do. I think dedicated, daily park wardens is exactly what is required...with a hotline to SNT teams on the beat. Is there no way money made from Gala or from Park parking fees can be diverted to provide that funding? I feel it would be a really good use of money. The principle aim being to maintain the park as a safe and relaxing environment for all.
    • Its almost the same as Grove Vale School , now Goose Green School.
    • They used to have dedicated park wardens, who I'm sure used to look after the parks and locked and opened the gates. Years ago I knew someone who was one. I thought they were based in that hut by the toilets. Are they not there any more? The community wardens are attached to the police rather than a specific park, aren't they?
    • Yes, sad how Rye Lane has taken a dive, interesting to see those pics CPR Dave. It's shocking how the section between Choumert Road and the Nag's Head in particular has lost its vibrancy, meanwhile the next section to the top of Peckham Rye Common has gentrified. Wonder why such a distinction in fortunes? Anyway the station square plans have fallen behind yet again, demolition won't now start this summer. The only "work" that will now take place this summer is surveying of the arcade, which they've had 10 years since planning permission to do. At least the replacement TSB branch has progressed but the Blenheim Grove corner building still looks unfinished, despite claims it "is now complete". https://www.southwark.gov.uk/planning-environment-and-building-control/current-and-future-development/peckham-and-nunhead-2
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...