Should all Social Security Benefit awards be publically available for inspection

[purdyamos 10]

It seemed obvious to me that Cloudy meant 'scroungers' ie people making claims they weren't entitled to

 

Why should genuine claimants have the often deeply sensitive and personal details of their lives served up for public prurience for the sake of a few frauds?

 

I receive benefits for reasons even I have never discussed on the forum despite my reputation for frankness. The very idea that the information about my assessments and reasons would be available for anyone to read horrifies me.

 

Would you feel comfortable having your medical records passed around in the street, and every passer-by actively encouraged to comment and judge on its contents?

 

Unbelievable that anyone could even think it might be a good idea.

[Ms Macbeth 75]

Anyone wanting to know what benefits are available and the rates can find these on the DWP website. http://www.dwp.gov.uk/lifeevent/benefits/

 

I'd be very against any kind of personal information about people's individual situations being made public. The majority of people who receive benefits need them. I acknowledge there is a minority who have no health problems (physical or mental) and/or caring responsibilities to stop them working. However, I don't think publicising their finances would make any difference to people with that mindset anyway.

[happyhippy 11]

Anyone wanting to know what benefits are available and the rates can find these on the DWP website. http://www.dwp.gov.uk/lifeevent/benefits/

 

A caveat here.

 

Note that these are the full allowances for people. Many people have an entitlement which is much lower than the full rate of benefit.

 

I've sorted people's stuff out before where they'd have an entitlement of 60-odd pence of JSA, or Income Support. The thing is that that underlying entitlement for these people on low incomes (usually due to part-time work, or caring responsibilities, but it can be for a multitude of reasons), is a passport to other help, such as prescriptions, dental work, housing benefit, etc., which they wouldn't have known about, because of the misconceptions about their circumstances. Many a time, I've heard people say things like,

 

"But I'm working and single. I can't get any help.", or

 

"He's very ill, and I care for him. Between us we get too much for help.".

 

Well, actually, sometimes it's possible.

 

I only mention this because there are people would hear that 'X is claiming, but he went to work this afternoon.", and suchlike, and be up in arms, when, as I stated earlier, it can be perfectly legal.

[okka north 10]

sorry but this really is a strange question. This is obviously personal to you and you have a issue with someone claiming OR you desperately want to know if someone is as they are avoiding something or someone.

[Bonny 10]

Please either quote me correctly or don't bother................I said all those whom choose to leach off society................ I'm neither liberal nor illiterate, unlike your good self.

 

I quoted your exact words - was that not correct Are you telling me you did not post the words that i quoted?

 

See later post.

[psyn 10]

Why should anyone (and everyone) have access to an individual's social security benefits via publicly accessible information via a library and/or internet? This is tantamount to advocating a Snooper's Charter.

 

If anyone has reasonable grounds for suspecting that someone is making a fraudulent benefit claim, they need only inform the relevant agency for an investigation to be made.

 

a lot of people wont be aware that their neighbors, colleagues or friends are on benifits in the first place.

f,a,s, if I could check to see what my n/d neighbor was claiming I then might have a suspicion he was being dishonest, and could report him or even back him up if the opposite were true.but if I never knew he was getting jsa, why would I tell the jobcentre he goes to work at the Chinese restaurant as a driver every night?

 

as for public sector pay privacy, surely if you know some one is a nurse etc of a particular grade it is possible to find out their pay scale and wage accordingly.

[Bonny 10]

Agree. I have nothing to hide. Perhaps all those whom choose to leach off society should also be exposed ?

 

I trust the above quote is correct?

 

''...all those whom choose to leach off society should also be exposed?" sic

 

So please explain, if you didn't mean all those who claim social security benefits (as per the thread title) which group of people are you referring to?

 

Also, when you use the word 'leach' what exactly are you trying to infer? That particular words refers normally to a leak or seepage of liquid.

 

Oh and when you call me illiterate, do you understand what that word actually means? I'm not normally one to criticise, or even pass comment on the spelling or grammer in posts on this forum as I appreciate many people have particular difficulties and don't need or want them highlighting. But in your case, I suggest you try to use a dictionary if you want to be sure that your words are not missunderstood.

 

It's unfortunate that the mis-use of words in a forum such as this, that relies on a reasonable command of the English language, causes confusion.

 

To have personal information about an individual freely available to all, without consent of the individual and without a specific requirement, is in breach of the Data protection act. What criteria would be used to decide whose details is made public if it's not all those claiming social security benefits? And if a criteria was used which indicated those people were claiming unlawfully or immorally then action should be taken by those responsible for investigation such claimants - thus no need for their personal information to be made public. However, should someone be found guilty of making an illegal claim I see no reason why they are not named and shamed in the vast majority of cases.

 

Oh and for information, i'm not liberal.

[Plain Talker 11]

a lot of people wont be aware that their neighbors, colleagues or friends are on benifits in the first place.

f,a,s, if I could check to see what my n/d neighbor was claiming I then might have a suspicion he was being dishonest, and could report him or even back him up if the opposite were true.but if I never knew he was getting jsa, why would I tell the jobcentre he goes to work at the Chinese restaurant as a driver every night?

 

as for public sector pay privacy, surely if you know some one is a nurse etc of a particular grade it is possible to find out their pay scale and wage accordingly.

 

the point is, psyn, it's actually none of your, or anyone else's business if someone is or isn't claiming benefits of any sort. It's entirely between themselves and any agency they may claim benefits through.

 

Yes, of course, if it is known someone is claiming fraudulently, then fine, they should be prosecuted.

 

But what about the malicious reporter? my ex was disabled and was left as a single parent, after we broke up, bringing my step sons up on his own, and claiming as such.

 

Every Xmas, without fail, for the longest time, someone (the same person each time) would report him, just before Xmas, as "working".

 

He wasn't, but that didn't stop the DSS stopping all his benefits, until it was investigated, and proven that he wasn't "fiddling".

 

It was always the same time of year, and always just in time to ruin his Xmas. no food, no money, no present for the lads.

 

The ex knew who it was, and it was all entirely malicious.

 

He finally got it settled by going in, one particular year, just before the person was due to contact the social. he explained that within the next few days, this person was going to call, alleging "X, Y and Z" about his claim, and suposed fraud. He took proofs of his conditions and what have you, proving that it was physicaly impossible for him to be working up a ladder, roofing/ brickie-ing etc, and the DSS finally accepted that this person's allegations were purely malice.

[Heyesey 11]

And who would decide who the 'leeches' are? The OP is talking about anybody who receives a payment which he calls a 'Social Security payment. It's reasonable to infer he means one from DWP and/or HMRC.

 

Every single instance on the thread so far, save for salaries, are as described above. Again, are the people I mentioned 'leeches'?

 

 

All of the people described above are taking money out. That's pretty much the only definition of "leech" I can think of, so yes, they all are.

 

Where you, and he, go wrong is in thinking that such a term is derogatory, when it's merely an accurate description. He's trying to use a derogatory term on purpose; you're trying to have it withdrawn because of its derogatory nature; you're both wrong. Just because I'm a leech doesn't mean I have no right to be.

[Longcol 602]

I'd be quite happy to see details published about what the richest people in our country pay in tax - for instance Lord Ashcroft.

 

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/conservatives/story/0,,2208174,00.html

 

And I wonder how much Rupert Murdoch pays in taxes considering the influence the Sun, the Times, Sky etc. have.

[jsmith 10]

Yes its our money they are taking and as such we have every right to know who gets what,if you are in receit of MY MONEY I have a right to know.

[happyhippy 11]

All of the people described above are taking money out. That's pretty much the only definition of "leech" I can think of, so yes, they all are.

 

Where you, and he, go wrong is in thinking that such a term is derogatory, when it's merely an accurate description. He's trying to use a derogatory term on purpose; you're trying to have it withdrawn because of its derogatory nature; you're both wrong. Just because I'm a leech doesn't mean I have no right to be.

 

Not at all. The term was merely used to be a derogatory term.