DWP planning home visits to check benefits

[Maurice Picarda]

it's about tightening the regime surrounding claimants

No, it's adjacent to that.

and it's about reducing the number of claimants.

Absolutely. And almost all of us are agreed that fraudulent claimants exist (although we'd rather HMRC was similarly aggressive, and that entitlement assessment focused more on identifying people who should claim but don't), and that reducing their numbers is a valid policy goal.

So, aside from ickiness about nasty government men on the sofas where children play, what has been explained?

 

[DotCommunist]

reducing numbers isn't a valid policy goal- a pool of unemployed labour is absolutely necessary for a neoliberal economy to function. Its nothing to do with policy review this or blue sky agenda that, its as plain as the penis on your forehead that these twonks are simply giving claimants a hard time again because it sells well with their little r/w fourth estate echo chamber

 

[weepiper]

No, it's adjacent to that.



Absolutely. And almost all of us are agreed that fraudulent claimants exist (although we'd rather HMRC was similarly aggressive, and that entitlement assessment focused more on identifying people who should claim but don't), and that reducing their numbers is a valid policy goal.

So, aside from ickiness about nasty government men on the sofas where children play, what has been explained?

There's really no need to be so deeply unpleasant. It's a beautiful day

 

[Awesome Wells]

I certainly regard Awesome Wells as a nutter.

I don't, and didn't, equate claimants with privacy loons. There is some overlap, because privacy loons, like the rest of us, use a variety of public services.

Your point about my motivations is unclear but doesn't seem in any way fair.

'privacy loons'?

Really?

 

[Maurice Picarda]

reducing numbers isn't a valid policy goal- a pool of unemployed labour is absolutely necessary for a neoliberal economy to function. Its nothing to do with policy review this or blue sky agenda that, its as plain as the penis on your forehead that these twonks are simply giving claimants a hard time again because it sells well with their little r/w fourth estate echo chamber

Except that the policy goal relates to fraudulent claims, not to surplus labour per se, and that the policy is neither new nor a particularly publicised initiative.

 

[DotCommunist]

Except that the policy goal relates to fraudulent claims, not to surplus labour per se, and that the policy is neither new nor a particularly publicised initiative.

ha, the other one has bells on

 

[Awesome Wells]

Except that the policy goal relates to fraudulent claims, not to surplus labour per se, and that the policy is neither new nor a particularly publicised initiative.

How does knocking at someone's door stop fraud? You can't force people to hand over personal data such as bank statements without, i imagine, a court order. If you can get one of those, why do you need to knock at doors, just go direct to the bank and look up the account details directly.

What happens if the person tells you he doesn't keep his bank statements? Assuming he lets you into his house at all, which he, afaik, isn't legally obliged to do since, again afik, the dwp doorsteppers don't have right of entry.

Mind you i wouldn't be surprised if they were given thus.

 

[Maurice Picarda]

How does knocking at someone's door stop fraud?
.

Already been discussed at length - the main thing they are interested in is probably honesty about family circumstances, such as children, relationships and tenancies. This is where home visits help.

 

[Wilf]

Already been discussed at length - the main thing they are interested in is probably honesty about family circumstances, such as children, relationships and tenancies. This is where home visits help.

 

[Awesome Wells]

Already been discussed at length - the main thing they are interested in is probably honesty about family circumstances, such as children, relationships and tenancies. This is where home visits help.

oh, so now it's helping the claimant!

Doorstepping you unannounced in a culture of bigotry fear and suspicious is a good thing?!?

 

[weepiper]

It's got fuck all to do with reducing fraud and everything to do with making it more unpleasant to claim in an attempt to push people off their books.

 

[_angel_]

It's got fuck all to do with reducing fraud and everything to do with making it more unpleasant to claim in an attempt to push people off their books.

Like council housing is meant to be seen as only for deserving etc. Harrassing people in their own homes. I don't know why after ten years of being here, they suddenly get suspicious!

 

[DotCommunist]

wrt council housing there has been a complete number done. I grew up living on 'council estates' that had been before RTB. My nan talks of council housing post war when she was young, how it wasn't ghetto bullshit housing for the neediest people. It was just renting off the council.

its an important point man, can't emphasise this enough- all forms of state 'benefits' must be universal. Yea unto him who is rich and to him who is poor. If you make it means tested etc, ghettoisation. Maurice was giving it about social democracy earlier (but it wasn't a soc/dec I recognized). We are being run by headbanging ideologues and outright spivs (have you seen shapps record?)

 

[_angel_]

The culture against council tenants has stepped up so much since I even moved in here. There was an old lady at the housing office, who missed her rent by one day because she was ill and there was snow on the ground, who was harangued by the council at ten o clock at night, just for being a day late with the rent. It wasn't like that when I moved in.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

wrt council housing there has been a complete number done. I grew up living on 'council estates' that had been before RTB. My nan talks of council housing post war when she was young, how it wasn't ghetto bullshit housing for the neediest people. It was just renting off the council.

certainly in its earlier days, and to a lesser extent until well after 1945, you pretty much needed a steady job to get a council house / flat...

 

[campanula]

Having been twice on the receiving end of fraud investigations, let me tell you that the flimsiest of evidence (my son answering my phone) is enough to trigger an intrusive investigation which goes on for months and impacts on all aspects of life. Both times, allageations of fraud were unfounded yet the fear and anxiety that I was going to lose my home and be utterly destitute went on for months (recorded intervies, scrutiny of medical, financial and even household utility records.....feeling like a criminal, I had prove who is or is not at my house whether we ate together....who contributed in any way - demands to see my son's tenancies, letters from his landlord (he has never claime4d benefits but hey....he might have been subsidising me....or even staying in his old bedroom - not that he would have had ANY rights as a tenant despite having to pay rent to the council if he did live at home).....you have no idea of the level of scrutiny.....how often my adult children visit for example, whether they work and so on and so forth (I am in poor health and rely on them) Have you any idea, Maurice Picarda, just how much social engineering is deployed towards council tenants for example.....or the disgusting attitudes many of these investigators.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

Calm down.

sorry, some times this kind of thing makes me quite cross

 

[Greebo]

sorry, some times this kind of thing makes me quite cross

And so it should.

Although, thinking about it, maybe my joke in reply to the benefit fraud officer asking "Do you have anyone else living here?" was unwise and may possibly have led to repeat visits: "No, unless they're bunking down in the boiler cupboard" - it and the adjacent gutted airing cupboard would be large enough for a single mattress, if not for the partition, the washing machine, a lot of pipes, and the boiler being in there.