Should the British Government be responsible for housing and feeding ex-pats returning from Thailand?

[mommysboy]

2 hours ago, al007 said:

Look it is pretty simple, whilst the laws are as they are the UK has to pay

 

It could be worse for the UK he could have been drawing on UK benefit all the time he was in thailand

 

However for those that are fully upto date with their NI contributions whether by voluntary contributions or retired and fully paid I hope the UK will continue to grant this option

 

I hope at 72 I never have to avail myself of this but it is also reassuring to know as a last resort it is there

 

It's pretty much what I think too. 

 

For me, 'Mark' represents an extreme- someone who has behaved badly at every turn and who has lost any moral right to assistance, albeit the mitigation is that he has a terrible addiction.  Yet it is vital people understand that rights are not to be qualified by other peoples' moral judgements; mine or anyones.  He is receiving the benefits to which he is entitled. 

 

The question is framed as a should, which indeed suggests that opinion is sought so there is a validity to most posts. 

 

Entitlements are based on residency and not the amount of contributions paid.  That's a key distinction, and it has ramifications for all ex-pats who feel they could be forced back home to receive emergency treatment, or feel they made need social care, such as the services of a nursing home. 

 

Although I have never heard of such a case, it is technically possible that a returning ex-pat who is discovered to have come back recently, could be denied elective treatment, eg, advanced cancer treatment or could be presented with the bill.  I could not foresee the situation where a homeless, sick, old person is discharged back to the streets.

 

As I mentioned in previous postings: all expats are in the same boat regarding welfare benefits.  For this reason alone, one should think very carefully before championing the denial of benefits of one of us for any reason.

[mommysboy]

1 hour ago, wakeupplease said:

 

Oh come on he paid in very little compared to the rest of us as he legged it overseas for a better life which ended in failure, so then you expect everyone else to pay for his problems.

 

fake refugees, yes there are some, but even they pay tax of one sort or another, where mark sat in the sunshine and got pissed every day and now expects the UK to support him.

 

So many on here knock the old country but thats where they run when the S>>> hits the fan as it will for most expats here.

 

No, we expect him to receive benefits that he is entitled to when he is back resident in the UK.

 

He has paid tax before, although quite where they calculate 15 years from I don't know.  He is also now a taxpayer, but obviously doesn't earn enough to be taxed. He pays VAT on the booze and cigs. of course.

 

The UK does not pay for his problems in Thailand, and indeed that did not happen.

 

[nontabury]

9 hours ago, cheeryble said:

I suspect UK citizens do indeed get at least the same benefits as new immigrants, and probably have to go through a lot less hoops.

I think the idea is in a wealthy nation we make sure everyone at least has their very basic needs filled as a sign of civilisation.

With automation growing apace it won't be long before a universal basic income ......with no work required......is brought in. This is a sign of growing wealth aided partially by that automation.

Guess which country has led with a UBI.

Norway? Denmark? France? America?

 

No.....Iran.

 

From my knowledge returning British citizens do not receive the same help/assistance as newly arrived economic migrants. And anyone who has returned to the UK with their Thai wife will tell you,there are many hoops to go through,not always the case with the so called refugees'

[nontabury]

8 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

"He is probably not the best example"

 

He's probably the worst example it was possible to find!

 

Maybe that's why they are useing him as an example. The same as when the British media always publish a photo of a Brit relaxing by the sea in some tropical paradise, with a beer in his hand, when the issue of frozen pensions is raised.

Edited October 3, 2017 by nontabury

[7by7]

4 minutes ago, nontabury said:

From my knowledge returning British citizens do not receive the same help/assistance as newly arrived economic migrants. And anyone who has returned to the UK with their Thai wife will tell you,there are many hoops to go through,not always the case with the so called refugees'

 

Your knowledge is incorrect; You obviously missed my earlier post, so I will repeat it

1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

 

Non EEA national immigrants coming to live in the UK are not entitled to any benefits, except those they have paid the appropriate NICs for, until they have Indefinite Leave to Remain; which takes at least 5 years to obtain. If the spouse or partner of a British citizen, their British sponsor is able to claim any and all benefits they may be entitled to as an individual, but cannot claim any extra due to their immigrant spouse or partner living with them which they would otherwise be entitled to were their partner or spouse a British citizen. This includes eligibility to social housing.

 

It is different for returning British ex pats; all they have to do to be able to claim any and all benefits they would be entitled to had they never left the UK, including social housing, is pass the habitual residence test. See this from Citizens Advice. Note that, if they pass, they can receive these benefits immediately, they don't have to be a UK resident for at least three months as it claims in the OP.

 

They receive far more than refugees do!

 

An unemployed returning ex pat, aged 25 or over, would receive at least the minimum income support amount of £73.10 p.w.; asylum seekers receive a maximum allowance of £36.95 p.w..

 

 

Obtaining a spouse or partner visa does require certain hoops to be jumped through; not least the iniquitous financial requirement. But obtaining asylum in the UK is not a walk in the park either. In fact, in the latest year I can find figures for, 2015, 64% of UK asylum applications were rejected. Of those who appealed, 72% had their appeals rejected (source).

[nontabury]

8 hours ago, losername said:

You and other contributors mention Muslims.  As far as I am aware UK law and benefits do not favour one faith over others.  Faith need not be mentioned, it only breeds misplaced attitudes.

 

The law may not have favourates, but the system does. 

[7by7]

Just now, nontabury said:

 

The law may not have favourates, but the system does. 

 

Your evidence for this being?

 

Hard evidence, not the rants of people like Stephen Lennon.

[4737 Carlin]

2 hours ago, Proboscis said:

What are "ethnic Brits?" Celts? Anglo-saxons? And how would you prove the purity of the ethnicity? By DNA?

 

Apart from being racist in the extreme, be careful what you wish for as you would not be the first person espousing such views who found that their DNA reflected . . . shall we say a much more diverse genome than they hitherto thought they had.

Yes - Celts and Anglo Saxons - and to repeat myself again - "Its insane that this point-of-view is even considered controversial - that is is what decades of brainwashing will do to a people."

If a European couple have a child in Thailand do you think the Thai's would ever consider that child to be a Thai ?

[4737 Carlin]

1 hour ago, Machiavelli said:

Ethnic Brits? What a laugh. No such thing exists. 

Unbelievable. To repeat "... that is is what decades of brainwashing will do to a people."

 

[nontabury]

11 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 

Your evidence for this being?

 

Hard evidence, not the rants of people like Stephen Lennon.

 

As you know, my wife is now in the process of applying for a settlement visa. One of the requirements is that she must provide a certificate to show she is free from T.B.

she must also provide a Thai police document showing that she has no criminal past. These rules are in place for good reasons, and I fully accept them. What I cannot accept is that some people with no connection at all to the U.K. are exempt.

 

[KiChakayan]

5 hours ago, Thai Ron said:

 

So you're basically saying, one shouldn't come to Thailand until one is old and smashed up.?

He didn't say that. But as far as I am concerned I am highly suspicious about all these younger guys who come without a good job nor the 100M bahts needed to support themselves for the rest of their lives.

Edited October 3, 2017 by KiChakayan

[billd766]

2 hours ago, Machiavelli said:

Ethnic Brits? What a laugh. No such thing exists. 

 

I can trace my family tree in the UK back to at least 1821 which is close on 200 years.

 

How about you?

[anon789561]

13 minutes ago, KiChakayan said:

He didn't say that. But as far as I am concerned I am highly suspicious about all these younger guys who come without a good job nor the 100M bahts needed to support themselves for the rest of their lives.

try not to be too highly suspicious of 'all these younger guys'. there are a hell of a lot of companies and corporations employing a hell of a lot of these 'younger guys' across all manner of industries and professions in Thailand

[KiChakayan]

2 minutes ago, Happy enough said:

try not to be too highly suspicious of 'all these younger guys'. there are a hell of a lot of companies and corporations employing a hell of a lot of these 'younger guys' across all manner of industries and professions in Thailand

You didn't read me...

[transam]

3 hours ago, Thai Ron said:

 

Clumsy attempt at deflecting attention away from your inability to back up the drivel you spout.

 

Are you sure you're even British? Alf Garnett is a fictional character played by Warren Mitchell.

 

Google him. As you're so fond of saying Google's your mate

I can assure you I am not Warren Mitchell, so I have no idea why you have referred to me as either. Usually folk who do that sort of stuff have lost...

 

I am in fact English which many members here will confirm if it is important to you...

 

Clumsy, never clumsy, just pointless arguing with blind folk that know nothing...

[elliss]

3 hours ago, Grusa said:

What? You have them file a CV before you buy them a drink?

    

             Before you bar fine them , i always do . 

              I should know , a pure Brit , born n bred . 555

[7by7]

1 hour ago, nontabury said:

 

As you know, my wife is now in the process of applying for a settlement visa. One of the requirements is that she must provide a certificate to show she is free from T.B.

she must also provide a Thai police document showing that she has no criminal past. These rules are in place for good reasons, and I fully accept them. What I cannot accept is that some people with no connection at all to the U.K. are exempt.

 

 You forgot the English tests.

 

Yes, applicants from Thailand, and other countries where TB is prevalent, applying to enter the UK for more than 6 months do need a certificate to show they are free from TB.

 

But they do not need a police certificate nor any other criminal record check unless they are a Tier 2 (General) visa applicant who wants to work in specified health, education or social care sectors. This applies to all non EEA nationals. Though all applicants are asked about criminal convictions on the form; as you know.

 

At least until Brexit, EEA nationals coming to the UK to exercise a treaty right are exempt from these; as are British nationals doing the same in another EEA member state.

 

Non EEA national applicants from countries not on this list do not need a TB certificate, and applicants in Anglophone countries are exempt from the English tests, though not from the LitUK test.

 

So yes, you are correct. some people with no connection to the UK are exempt from the TB test and English tests requirements; Americans for example.

[SheungWan]

1 hour ago, billd766 said:

 

I can trace my family tree in the UK back to at least 1821 which is close on 200 years.

 

How about you?

 

Do you ask everybody at the dinner table whether their family tree meets the 200 year test?

[SheungWan]

.......Absolutely essential that you do make up a league table of family tree longevity.

Edited October 3, 2017 by SheungWan

[al007]

3 hours ago, mommysboy said:

Although I have never heard of such a case, it is technically possible that a returning ex-pat who is discovered to have come back recently, could be denied elective treatment, eg, advanced cancer treatment or could be presented with the bill.  I could not foresee the situation where a homeless, sick, old person is discharged back to the streets.

 

 

 

I believe that so long as you are returning permanently, you will be safe

 

I have looked at this in detail due to my current medical situation

 

I hope not to run out of money but have been assured by a large charity all I have to say on returning. I have come home for good and when I enquired what proof I would need was told none

 

I even been advised I could be met by an ambulance at the airport and social services would assist as well

 

And sadly if I had to go home my life would in any case have a limited time span

 

My message is if you are genuine probably no problem, do not over worry and hope it never comes to that

 

Trust you are doing OK mommysboy

 

 

[Machiavelli]

1 hour ago, billd766 said:

 

I can trace my family tree in the UK back to at least 1821 which is close on 200 years.

 

How about you?

I don't care. I'm busy. The population make up of the UK was different 200 years ago, is different now and will look completely different in 200 years time. Migration has been happening since humans started walking on two feet. Ethnic this and ethnic that is going to stop migration and certainly isn't going to stop woman breeding out of your beloved "ethnic" gene pool.

Edited October 3, 2017 by Machiavelli

[George FmplesdaCosteedback]

Without dredging through 6 pages:

This guy is a loser.

The other side of the coin though:

Since "refugees" are very well treated with housing and benefits without a 3 month wait why shouldn't there be better help for the likes of "Mark"?

?

Edited October 3, 2017 by George FmplesdaCosteedback

[SheungWan]

4 minutes ago, George FmplesdaCosteedback said:

Without dredging through 6 pages:

This guy is a loser.

The other side of the coin though:

Since "refugees" are often very well treated with housing and benefits without a 3 month wait why shouldn't there be better help for the likes of "Mark"?

?

 

Mark would like a free tab be made available at Wetherspoons

[7by7]

2 minutes ago, George FmplesdaCosteedback said:

Without dredging through 6 pages:

This guy is a loser.

The other side of the coin though:

Since "refugees" are often very well treated with housing and benefits without a 3 month wait why shouldn't there be better help for the likes of "Mark"?

?

As has already been shown; your comments about refugees being treated better than returning ex pats are completely false.

 

As is the claim made in the OP that returning ex pats have to wait for three months before they can claim benefits in the UK.

 

See my post on page 14.

[Machiavelli]

2 hours ago, 4737 Carlin said:

Unbelievable. To repeat "... that is is what decades of brainwashing will do to a people."

 

It's astounding! Do people really care about being an "ethnic Brit"? Does that come with some kind of gong or 70 virgins? 

[boilerman]

sorry this guy has partied his life away yes the demon drink is a terrible problem but it sounds like people have been falling over to help his he is still fairly young there is work if you want it i came back from zimbabwe in 1987 with £150 in my pocket as we were not allowed to take our funds out i sofa surfed for a few months rented a room and worked all the hours god sent it seems ever body want a free ride in the uk he has had a good time it is now time to wake up and smell the coffee and start grafting

[Jonmarleesco]

16 hours ago, webfact said:

Mark ... was horrified to discover that he was not eligible to receive benefits until he had been back in the country for 3 months

Unless, of course, you're of the right religious, colour and ethnic group, preferably, though not necessarily, illegal.

[cheeryble]

3 hours ago, nontabury said:

 

The law may not have favourates, but the system does. 

 

Could you offer quality supportive evidence?

[Bangkokazy]

Everyone can live like Mark Smith.
Mark Smith made many mistakes.
1. No money
2. no friends
3. No place to live.
.............................
Possibilities
1. Kick a cop in the nuts. You have food+housing rooms + medical care for alcoholic for a long time.

[sanemax]

1 hour ago, Jonmarleesco said:

Unless, of course, you're of the right religious, colour and ethnic group, preferably, though not necessarily, illegal.

 If he was a Muslim non British person, he would be living in the Calais jungle in squalor