rodp Posted March 20, 2016 Report Share Posted March 20, 2016 Unfortunately, that has been dealt with by the people behind the counter in the Jobcentres, and they appear to not care how much they allow people to claim, as long as they have a quiet life. You perhaps may not know just how true that is. I knew a bloke who retired from customs and excise to a job centre for the last few working years. He openly admitted he couldn't give a **** about who got what, he just wanted them away from the counter as fast as possible. The lazy ******* used to make my blood boil, I sincerely hope he's now passed away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka Joe Posted March 20, 2016 Report Share Posted March 20, 2016 Unfortunately, that has been dealt with by the people behind the counter in the Jobcentres, and they appear to not care how much they allow people to claim, as long as they have a quiet life. Quite the opposite for my daughter then, swapping between jobs she had a spell signing on, & whilst there, over heard two women comparing how many they had taken benefits from that day, seems they had a hidden agenda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grrclark Posted March 20, 2016 Report Share Posted March 20, 2016 But how do you separate the crooks, work shy, feckless, lead swingers from the genuine people in need? The government seems to presume everyone is from the former catagory and punishes and disadvantages everyone, including those in real need.....that is indefenceable! Avoiding tax and fraudulent claims from the public purse should be dealt with by the justice system as the despicable crimes they are..........and not punished by a slap on the wrist and a few hours community service!...........but by lengthy jail terms as a deterrent..........they should perhaps start with the large organisations that rob the public purse by avoiding their fiscal responsibilities? This is the exact problem. Everyone is considered as being healthy unless they can prove otherwise, those that need the help most are almost the exception to how the system is setup. Would be much fairer if everyone was considered as a genuine claimant and the shysters were the exceptions, but the other way round is easier in what is a massive and complex system. As for the people behind the counters, some are good and some are appalingly bad; regrettably the appalingly bad can have a very real Impact on the life of someone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjimmer Posted March 20, 2016 Report Share Posted March 20, 2016 I was signing on for NI credits only and missed an appointment so had to start all over again. The next week I notice that a Jobseekers payment had been made to my bank account. At my next appointment, I told the chap they they had started paying me by mistake, to which he replied "You're not complaining, are you?" "Between you and me, they are not allowed to claim back anything they pay out by mistake." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
felly100 Posted March 20, 2016 Report Share Posted March 20, 2016 Oh yes they are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka Joe Posted March 20, 2016 Report Share Posted March 20, 2016 Personally I hope it splits the Tories in half & works in favour of leaving the EU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger-Mouse Posted March 20, 2016 Report Share Posted March 20, 2016 Oh yes they are. Must . . . resist . . . the . . . panto . . . reply . . . You`re correct, they can recover monies handed out by mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KFC Posted March 21, 2016 Report Share Posted March 21, 2016 Defrauding taxpayers money, false claims for expenses, working other well payed jobs whilst being payed by the taxpayer, being paid for two homes at a rate that is equivalent to a second income at the taxpayers expense and getting an £11,000 pay rise last year along with another £1,000 this year whilst the public sector is pegged to 1% and benefits are cut. That is the MP's Big business, which now runs the government, writes our laws and runs the tax system through lobbyists, is allowed to get away with avoiding tax and laundering money through property ownership using off-shore shell companies whilst Osborne proposes people in social housing should pay market rent if they're on a modest income and lose benefit if they happen to live in a property that has more than one bedroom. The point IDS was making is that Uncle Dave says "we're all in this together". We're not and never will be. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted March 21, 2016 Report Share Posted March 21, 2016 But how do you separate the crooks, work shy, feckless, lead swingers from the genuine people in need? The government seems to presume everyone is from the former catagory and punishes and disadvantages everyone, including those in real need.....that is indefenceable! Avoiding tax and fraudulent claims from the public purse should be dealt with by the justice system as the despicable crimes they are..........and not punished by a slap on the wrist and a few hours community service!...........but by lengthy jail terms as a deterrent..........they should perhaps start with the large organisations that rob the public purse by avoiding their fiscal responsibilities? I would say employ some people within the system who have some brains for starters. Perhaps worry less about 'offending' them during the qualifying process. Make sure they are offered jobs they are physically capable of doing,maybe offer them some voluntary work,helping people who may be in the same situation. I dont believe everyone is looked upon with suspicion ,I think its probably the opposite. I have a friend,known him for 35 years,never been much of one to graft. Perfectly able bodied 20 years ago,he has steadily over eaten to his present weight of 40 stone. To the point his knees are worn out ,and his mobility is impaired,he has a disability car (a nice 4x4) and extra money for food,as he has takeaways twice a day. He has basically eaten himself disabled. He has a 18 yr old daughter who lives with him (she is his 'carer') she is also morbidly obese and has 'learning difficulties' probably because she rarely went to school. So I ask him if he is worried about PIPs or benefit cuts,he laughs ! He has never been challenged about his condition,because the first time they mention his weight, he screams they are abusing him or making fun of him,he then lodges complaints. Between them they cost the taxpayer around 50k per year. Its this and many other situations that make the present system the farce it is. Of course there are genuine people who need and rely on DLA, but there are plenty who are just leeching of society because they are LAZY. We need people who can tell the difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjimmer Posted March 21, 2016 Report Share Posted March 21, 2016 Oh yes they are. When they asked me to return the money they had paid out by mistake, I told them that I understood they couldn't insist on it. CAB had confirmed what the JobCentre chap had told me. Their reply: "That's correct, but we have to try". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yod dropper Posted March 21, 2016 Report Share Posted March 21, 2016 Osborne proposes people in social housing should pay market rent if they're on a modest income Why not? Why shouldn't this benefit (subsidised housing) be based on need rather than because you once needed help? We stop other benefits, why not this one? Others who earn less and are more in need might well not get this benefit. The millionaire businessman Levi Roots is still in his council house with its subsidised rent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norfolk dumpling Posted March 21, 2016 Report Share Posted March 21, 2016 I agree with market rents for high earners in social housing provided, of course, the funds are then used to build more properties for rent. I can't recall the exact numbers but there were significant numbers earning in excess of £30k pa in social housing - and a good % over £100k. Sadly I suppose this may not happen if these are on Tory heartland! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted March 21, 2016 Report Share Posted March 21, 2016 Unfortunately, that has been dealt with by the people behind the counter in the Jobcentres, and they appear to not care how much they allow people to claim, as long as they have a quiet life. Good post, you have hit the nail right on the head. Civil Servants taking the path of least resistance is definitely part of the problem, but it also applies to doctors, housing officers and social workers as well. Whether or not you are entitled to it if you pester them for long enough they will buckle and give it to you just to get rid of you. The really sick and disabled don't have the stamina for this, they are too ill How you unravel decades of systematic abuse is beyond me, but it does go on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted March 21, 2016 Report Share Posted March 21, 2016 I agree with market rents for high earners in social housing provided, of course, the funds are then used to build more properties for rent. I can't recall the exact numbers but there were significant numbers earning in excess of £30k pa in social housing - and a good % over £100k. Sadly I suppose this may not happen if these are on Tory heartland! Council rents were never really susidised years ago, certainly not to the extent they are now, why shouldn't people be expected to pay the going rate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KFC Posted March 21, 2016 Report Share Posted March 21, 2016 Why not? Why shouldn't this benefit (subsidised housing) be based on need rather than because you once needed help? We stop other benefits, why not this one? Others who earn less and are more in need might well not get this benefit. The millionaire businessman Levi Roots is still in his council house with its subsidised rent. I did say MODEST income, not millionaires. A couple on £40,000 a year in London may suddenly find themselves having to find £2.500 a month in rent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armsid Posted March 21, 2016 Report Share Posted March 21, 2016 the problem we have in the uk is the fact we do not have thousands of jobs in engineering and other allied trades paying good wages most of jobs are zero hours minimum wage so they get in work benifits and a higher threshhold to pay tax hence a large welfare bill look at the amount we pay to brussells just think of the good paying jobs we could create and therefore pay tax but having a low wage economy will not lower the deficit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrowningB525 Posted March 21, 2016 Report Share Posted March 21, 2016 (edited) the problem we have in the uk is the fact we do not have thousands of jobs in engineering and other allied trades paying good wages most of jobs are zero hours minimum wage so they get in work benifits and a higher threshhold to pay tax hence a large welfare bill look at the amount we pay to brussells just think of the good paying jobs we could create and therefore pay tax but having a low wage economy will not lower the deficit About 1% 2.4% of jobs are zero hours contracts. Hardly most. Edited March 22, 2016 by BrowningB525 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris1961 Posted March 21, 2016 Report Share Posted March 21, 2016 (edited) Oh dear what a shame NOT IDS that man has caused more suffering to the disabled he should hang his head in shame penalised the weak to favor the rich rant over Edited March 21, 2016 by chris1961 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted March 21, 2016 Report Share Posted March 21, 2016 (edited) About 1% of jobs are zero hours contracts. Hardly most. According to the office of National Statistics 1.4 million are on zero hours contracts, that's a lot more than 1% but its the rate at which its growing that should be causing concern. And thousands more are on 'no contract' or bogus self employed scams and its growing all the time. Part of the problem is that the employers know the staff will be topped up so they can get away with it. There is also a growing number of people who are employed by "umbrella companies" registered outside the UK. Effectively foreign employment agencies that feed british companies with agency staff. Hotels and warehousing seem fond of these and they don't have to pay minimum wage and there are no UK employment rights. Edited March 21, 2016 by Vince Green Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scolopax Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 We are all in this together........apart from pensioners. Time their winter fuel allowance was done away with for a start. This protection of government departments from any spending cuts also needs a serious review. Cannot see why the NHS is protected, costs us all an absolute fortune, a bloated monolith ripe for cutting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norfolk dumpling Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 In the business where I work the drivers are all on zero hours contracts by choice - we are all retired who are supplementing our pensions or simply getting out of the wife's way by taking on this work. Next year when I get my state pension I leave as I head into a higher tax band. It's not all about poor hard up people struggling to survive on minimum wage/zero hours! This is a national company employing thousands of people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKPoacher Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 In the business where I work the drivers are all on zero hours contracts by choice - we are all retired who are supplementing our pensions or simply getting out of the wife's way by taking on this work. Next year when I get my state pension I leave as I head into a higher tax band. It's not all about poor hard up people struggling to survive on minimum wage/zero hours! This is a national company employing thousands of people. There could be a case for you and your retired, part timers taking the jobs of those who need them. If Tesco and the like didn't have zero hours contract delivery drivers they would have to employ someone on a proper contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrowningB525 Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 According to the office of National Statistics 1.4 million are on zero hours contracts, that's a lot more than 1% but its the rate at which its growing that should be causing concern. And thousands more are on 'no contract' or bogus self employed scams and its growing all the time. Part of the problem is that the employers know the staff will be topped up so they can get away with it. There is also a growing number of people who are employed by "umbrella companies" registered outside the UK. Effectively foreign employment agencies that feed british companies with agency staff. Hotels and warehousing seem fond of these and they don't have to pay minimum wage and there are no UK employment rights. My mistake it's 2.4% of the workforce and there are 744,000 people on zero hours contracts. http://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours/articles/contractswithnoguaranteedhours/2015-09-02 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead-Eyed Duck Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 Oh dear what a shame NOT IDS that man has caused more suffering to the disabled he should hang his head in shame penalised the weak to favor the rich rant over Drivel, and as you quite rightly say a rant. There is not a bottomless pit of money, and if you care to look at IDS's background he has always had a 'care' for those in the community. He has had the thankless job of trying to manage a ballooning (in payments) department - what is your suggestion - that we pay as much as they want to all applicants? It has to be managed somehow, and there will always be a fall guy who has to make the decisions. No such system can be faultless, and all you can do is try to root out the scammers (we all know a few) and protect those most in need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grrclark Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 There could be a case for you and your retired, part timers taking the jobs of those who need them. If Tesco and the like didn't have zero hours contract delivery drivers they would have to employ someone on a proper contract.So people who might be able to scrape by on savings should voluntarily stand aside from a job that gives them extra cash because someone else 'more needy' could have that job? Why don't you extend that premise a little further and say people with savings in the bank should give that money to those who borrow, after all arguably they need that money more. Why is a zero hours contract not a 'proper contract'? There are many people, as stated above, who really enjoy the flexibility of zero hours, likewise there are loads of businesses who need the flexibility otherwise they would not have a business. People have been working on a casual labour basis for years and years, just that we have given it a name now "zero hours contract" that folk get all up in arms about it on the basis of half baked and thoroughly misplaced ideology. Of course there are businesses who abuse it, just as there are those who abuse fixed hours contracts or no paid overtime contracts and just the same as there are workers who abuse what their employer offers. Much easier to blame the instrument than the person playing it though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.