Crosswords3 mins ago
Housing Benefit Scandal
I have always felt that housing benefit was open to abuse, but this report just confirms it.
http://
The government pays out 24 BILLION pounds a year in Housing Benefit (which is bad enough in itself, I am sure if it was reduced rents would soon come down).
But they say 900 MIILION pounds of that is overpayments due to claimant error (maybe deliberate???), 340 MILLION pounds due to fraud, and 150 MILLION pounds due to errors by officials.
There was a case in my local paper the other day, an Asian woman a large house near my area was paid nearly £20,000 in Housing benefit she was not entitled to. When caught she was NOT sent to prison (suspended sentence) and told to pay back only a few hundred pounds. Seems almost worth it to me.
(I know I have mentioned she is Asian which some may say is not relevant, but I live on the edge of Birmingham with many Asians and I get sick to death of reading how many Asians get caught fiddling benefits. I know others do it, but Asians are past masters at it).
http://
http://
The government pays out 24 BILLION pounds a year in Housing Benefit (which is bad enough in itself, I am sure if it was reduced rents would soon come down).
But they say 900 MIILION pounds of that is overpayments due to claimant error (maybe deliberate???), 340 MILLION pounds due to fraud, and 150 MILLION pounds due to errors by officials.
There was a case in my local paper the other day, an Asian woman a large house near my area was paid nearly £20,000 in Housing benefit she was not entitled to. When caught she was NOT sent to prison (suspended sentence) and told to pay back only a few hundred pounds. Seems almost worth it to me.
(I know I have mentioned she is Asian which some may say is not relevant, but I live on the edge of Birmingham with many Asians and I get sick to death of reading how many Asians get caught fiddling benefits. I know others do it, but Asians are past masters at it).
http://
Answers
1 to 16 of 16
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by VHG. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
i know quite a lot of people who fiddle HB, all white btw, just thought i'd mention that as they've been getting away with it for years so must be masters at it. (I'm one of your asians who live on the outskirts of brum who doesn't fiddle or claim any benefits and pays tax)
the way they are all doing it is they have partners living with them & have part times jobs but not disclosing any of it
the way they are all doing it is they have partners living with them & have part times jobs but not disclosing any of it
//i know quite a lot of people who fiddle HB, all white btw, just thought i'd mention that as they've been getting away with it for years so must be masters at it. (I'm one of your asians who live on the outskirts of brum who doesn't fiddle or claim any benefits and pays tax)
the way they are all doing it is they have partners living with them & have part times jobs but not disclosing any of it //
mccfluff. If you know this & it is a fact, it is your duty to report it to the Birmingham Council Housing department. An anonymous phone call is all it takes ( if you are bothered about doing this no one will know that you made the call)
the way they are all doing it is they have partners living with them & have part times jobs but not disclosing any of it //
mccfluff. If you know this & it is a fact, it is your duty to report it to the Birmingham Council Housing department. An anonymous phone call is all it takes ( if you are bothered about doing this no one will know that you made the call)
I must take issue with your statements, Peter.
"...because we have filled out jails with prisoners on remand who should be bailed."
No we have not. The Bail Act 1976 is quite clear. Defendants are entitled to bail unless there are reasonable grounds to believe that they will either:
(a) Abscond
(b) Commit further offences, or
(c) Interfere with the course of justice
"Reasonable grounds" have to be supported by evidence. It is no use the judge or magistrates not liking the defendant's looks. There has to be evidence to support the belief that he will act in a way that an exception to bail is appropriate. If anything more defendants are bailed than should be as they are often given the benefit of the doubt by the court (and often appear in the Press when they reoffend whilst on bail). The Howard League for Penal Reform makes a strong play and suggests that many of those held in custody instead of being bailed go on to be acquitted. That is not the point. When considering a bail application the court does not consider the likliehood of a conviction - that is for the trial. It simply applies the Bail Act test I outlined above. In 2013 the average number of defendants held on remand at any one time was about 11,000 (about 12% of the prison capacity). Only those failing the Bail Act test are remanded in custody and the prison service must make available the capacity needed.
"we already jail more per head of population than anyone in the EU"
Not quite correct. The UK lies eleventh out of 28 in the "incarceration league". Leading the field are Lithuania (314 prisoners per 100,000 population) and Latvia (297). Other former communist bloc states follow, including Estonia, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Spain is higher on the list than the UK and our rate is 147 per 100k - the second highest of the "Western" nations.
But that is not the entire story. The UK does not have a propensity to jail people willy-nilly. Quite the reverse in fact - you have to be quite deliberately, seriously or serially criminal to get locked up here. In Spain or France almost all offences of violence attract a custodial sentence. In the UK only the most serious do. Even assaulting a police officer rarely results in custody.
The reason we have a relatively high incarceration rate in the UK is quite simple. It is because we have large numbers of people committing serious offences.
"...because we have filled out jails with prisoners on remand who should be bailed."
No we have not. The Bail Act 1976 is quite clear. Defendants are entitled to bail unless there are reasonable grounds to believe that they will either:
(a) Abscond
(b) Commit further offences, or
(c) Interfere with the course of justice
"Reasonable grounds" have to be supported by evidence. It is no use the judge or magistrates not liking the defendant's looks. There has to be evidence to support the belief that he will act in a way that an exception to bail is appropriate. If anything more defendants are bailed than should be as they are often given the benefit of the doubt by the court (and often appear in the Press when they reoffend whilst on bail). The Howard League for Penal Reform makes a strong play and suggests that many of those held in custody instead of being bailed go on to be acquitted. That is not the point. When considering a bail application the court does not consider the likliehood of a conviction - that is for the trial. It simply applies the Bail Act test I outlined above. In 2013 the average number of defendants held on remand at any one time was about 11,000 (about 12% of the prison capacity). Only those failing the Bail Act test are remanded in custody and the prison service must make available the capacity needed.
"we already jail more per head of population than anyone in the EU"
Not quite correct. The UK lies eleventh out of 28 in the "incarceration league". Leading the field are Lithuania (314 prisoners per 100,000 population) and Latvia (297). Other former communist bloc states follow, including Estonia, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Spain is higher on the list than the UK and our rate is 147 per 100k - the second highest of the "Western" nations.
But that is not the entire story. The UK does not have a propensity to jail people willy-nilly. Quite the reverse in fact - you have to be quite deliberately, seriously or serially criminal to get locked up here. In Spain or France almost all offences of violence attract a custodial sentence. In the UK only the most serious do. Even assaulting a police officer rarely results in custody.
The reason we have a relatively high incarceration rate in the UK is quite simple. It is because we have large numbers of people committing serious offences.
New Judge, on the Crimewatch TV programme there have been faces on the 'most wanted' section of people who have been bailed on conviction and awaiting sentence who've taken off for sunnier climes. They been convicted, some of them, of serious drug offences and could be facing long prison sentences. How could they be considered for bail when the risk of absconding is so strong?
1 to 16 of 16
