DRTY wrote:So I'm some daily Mail reader because I think it's wrong she does jack shit and gets handed everything on a plate? I don't even read fucking news rags.
If thinking it's wrong that someone can just sponge off of everyone else makes me an idiot then I'm an idiot. Yes there are much bigger problems, but I wasn't talking about them, so go make another thread.
Let's say everyone on DSF put £10 into a pot, then that money would be distributed amongst everyone so that they could buy new speakers and amps or something, with factors about current setups effecting how much you'd get back.... and someone lied about what they currently had to get an increased amount, that'd be wrong. There's no fucking issue there, it would be wrong.
I don't think anyone was having a go at you personally, more some of the posters who've chipped into this thread. The DM reader slur is of course more to do with their attitudes than actually reading the paper.
What I don't get is how, on very little evidence and without knowing her from adam, you've come to the conclusion that she is fraudulently claiming benefits. For all you know she could work from home, have a large inheritance, have MS etc. I mean think about it? Why would someone need their house cleaned all day every day? It's obviously a support worker or a carer getting her up in the mornings so her daughter does not need to provide the care that other children do and go to school.
Where's the fraud being committed? Where's the evidence of a second income or a job, you said yourself she's in the house all day. Surely if she could afford this Land Rover she'd be out earning all day? Even if you work from home you have to meet people and be seen to be doing business. She's not going to remain housebound for over twenty years so she can scab an extra £100 off the DSS.
It's a bit like reporting some guy with a dark complexion for hanging around a train station with a rucksack for being a terrorist.
*shrug*