Blether; you made a definite statement that the 70p in a £100 figure was wrong; I merely asked you what you thought the correct figure was and why.

All you had to do was answer; but you dodged.

Why not just admit that you don't know?

Humphrey, thanks for your input on Zambrano, but our friends case is being handled by a very competent immigration lawyer.

As for your wife and daughter; I do sympathise and you may have read my many posts in the visas and migration forum on this ridiculous new financial requirement.

This is not the place to discuss this requirement; but if the girl is your daughter and so a British citizen you only need to satisfy the income requirement for a spouse; £18,600 p.a.

Blether; you made a definite statement that the 70p in a £100 figure was wrong; I merely asked you what you thought the correct figure was and why.

All you had to do was answer; but you dodged.

Why not just admit that you don't know?

No. You're just trying to trick me into an argument.

Make all the excuses you like; but it was a simple question which you refuse to answer.

The conclusion is obvious.

I see no point in continuing any discussion with you until you do.

At last he takes the hint.

Blether; you made a definite statement that the 70p in a £100 figure was wrong; I merely asked you what you thought the correct figure was and why.

All you had to do was answer; but you dodged.

Why not just admit that you don't know?

In the original post it is stated as 1.1% - thus £1.10.

This is why I latched on to that one published figure in my first response, thus provoking SBK to bring up the charge of cherry-picking, which I consider inappropriate as Camoron himself has stated that his target is the UN guideline of 0.7% of government income. If the quoted figure in the OP is correct, then he has overshot by 50% of the recommendation.

Humphrey, thanks for your input on Zambrano, but our friends case is being handled by a very competent immigration lawyer.

As for your wife and daughter; I do sympathise and you may have read my many posts in the visas and migration forum on this ridiculous new financial requirement.

This is not the place to discuss this requirement; but if the girl is your daughter and so a British citizen you only need to satisfy the income requirement for a spouse; £18,600 p.a.

Our daughter was born in the Philippines and, although registered at the British Consulate, is an RP citizen.

My basic solution is to sell up in the UK and emigrate to the Philippines, taking my money and my pension there. I'll be deprived of the winter fuel allowance and will have to pay for the air-conditioning, but I can purchase a beach-front property for about 1/3rd of the money I would take with me - so the losers would be the British government.

I would miss all the very attractive students here in Cambridge, but that's the price being forced upon me.

Provided you are British otherwise than by descent then she is also British and you can get a British passport for her.

See the first part of British Citizenship Basics.

Even if you are British by descent you can still probably register her as British and then get a British passport for her. See here.

Worth doing, I'd have thought, even if you do sell up and move to the Philippines.

Both the Philippines and the UK allow dual nationality.

Provided you are British otherwise than by descent then she is also British and you can get a British passport for her.

See the first part of British Citizenship Basics.

Even if you are British by descent you can still probably register her as British and then get a British passport for her. See here.

Worth doing, I'd have thought, even if you do sell up and move to the Philippines.

Both the Philippines and the UK allow dual nationality.

You seem to be saying that someone British by naturalisation gets preference over someone British by descent.

I didn't realise it was as bad as that.

British nationality law can be complicated; it's all explained briefly in the link I gave earlier and in more detail in the links from there.

British by naturalisation is British otherwise than by descent.

It's not a matter of "preference" it's a matter of how the parent obtained their British nationality; in their own right or inherited from one or both of their parents.

Not sure what you mean, though, by "I didn't realise it was as bad as that."

As bad as what?

Not sure what you mean, though, by "I didn't realise it was as bad as that."

As bad as what?

I think a few people twigged it.

A new survey for the Royal Statistical Society and King's College London shows public opinion is repeatedly off the mark on issues including crime, benefit fraud and immigration.

Interesting the issues highlighted for special mention. Of course the questions chosen in order to focus on said issues may well have been highly selective, if not tailor made to give a desired impression. Ask another question, such as 'What percentage of immigrants are unemployed, break down by ethnicity, religion etc. Or perhaps what percentage of the total welfare budget is taken up by immigrants? Or maybe even, by what factor do you think immigrants (again by ethnicity, religion) are over represented in the prison population.

I can make a stab at answering the questions I posed, but the point is what is the perception of the British people on these questions? I suspect their estimates would actually undershoot reality, and this is my exact point, the devil is in what questions are posed.

:Lies, dam_n lies, and statistics.

r

, and that pot is getting raped by fraud. I know dozens of people claiming all sorts of benefits that they are not entitled to.

A little surprised at the ferocity of the use of rape, however I do not know of one person involved in benefit fraud. The welfare state is there to help those in need, for those that "rape" the system, should be reported. B do the right thing and report.

The word rape is strong but correct, systematic fraud takes place on a daily basis. Unfortunately in my experience the worst perpetrators are the immigrants. I know of one case where the guy of Asian descent had 105 flats under his control. He had 39 of them rented out to family members who didn't stay in them, he then re-let them on the quiet into the private market.

Average rental of £450.00 per month, £5400.00 per year x 39 when he got caught. £211,000 a year in housing benefit fraud, that's what you call raping the system. I was astounded, genuinely astounded when I read that the housing benefit bill was £23 billion a year. I know several people that keep their flat under the benefit system and live elsewhere, I know one guy that's being doing that since 2006. 7 years the flat has been empty but his reckoning is that the government pays it anyway and if he ever falls out with his lady he has somewhere to go back to.

Two guys on the sick that ran their own joinery business, one boasting that he had £12,000 cash in a shoe box below his bed. 5 years they ran that business, they got caught and got a warning. No penalty, just a written warning.

It's endemic, from low to high level. The only figure I trust is the pension payment, even then not absolutely as there have been rare cases of people claiming for dead people. Outside that I don't trust a singular government figure in this regard, not one. Just about everyone I interview for jobs these asks me if it's possible for me to pay them a full time wage but only declare 16 hours a week so they can get maximum benefits.

I don't do it cos if I'm going to bump the tax man I'll do it for myself and no one else, of course I'm lily white in that regard.

What's the solution? It's easy.......the government should hand control of the benefits system to private debt collection firms. They should be charged with examining every single claim in the system, every one. Give them a year and they will blow these frauds apart. People only do them because the price for getting caught is not high enough, and the chances of being caught low. Give a private company an incentive to catch them and watch the domino effect.

Ok then B, but the use of the term rape is strong, so report it. Although sentences poorly reflect the act it is the law, only the individual or a cause can change it. Remember Kaisan, small steps and all that!!

I don't understand why people complain about fraud that they know is taking place yet don't report it to the authorities?

I suspect that most people who say they know of "dozens of people claiming all sorts of benefits that they are not entitled to" are exaggerating somewhat.

Yet, like Mossfinn and Susteno, I believe that if you know of even one person, let alone dozens, committing benefit fraud then you should report it.

Benefit fraud is theft; and the people these criminals are stealing from is not the government; the government doesn't have any money. The people these criminals are stealing from is the taxpayer; us.

Whether one accepts the government's figure on the level of fraud or whether one has one's own, higher figure, even if one refuses to say what that figure is, the level is too high.

Those who know of people who are committing fraud yet wont do anything about it are part of the problem.

I don't understand why people complain about fraud that they know is taking place yet don't report it to the authorities?

When I was working abroad (up to the beginning of last year) I rented my house out.

I had specificvally asked the letting agent NOT to rent to DHSS people, smokers and people with small children. This went very well for a few years until the letting agent was bought by one of the national real estate firms. Then the house was let to a single mother, paid for by the local authority.

She had two kids when she arrived, three when she left. I have had dozens of letters from debt-collecting firms since she was evicted, some addressed to her, some to her father, some to other names. I have passed her new address back to each correspondent, also the information that as her rent was being paid by the local authority, they could contact the authority for information.

Also, while this woman was in the house, she arranged for a grant of >£3k from a government agency (can't remember which, but the letter was from Belfast) for new furniture, regardless of the fact that I moved back into a bare house, which had been let fully furnished.

Many of the interior doors were damaged, either kicked-in or with holes at head-height, which seemed to me to indicate that some of her male guests had been a touch violent. (My neighbours told me she used to have taxis parked outside at night).

This woman cost me around £20k in house repairs and refurnishing, while she was getting grants off the government, rent paid by local authority, unpaid debts by her and hers of >£12k and she is near enough untouchable. My idiot agent has lost the lease she signed, so I have no come-back on the missing furniture, the assessor regards the damage as 'fair wear and tear' so nothing there. I have made nothing out of the past 8 years rent, only the agent has done that, with their 13% charge.

There is a different attitude to property, to ethical values, to money even, by the long-term unemployed. Many seem to regard their government hand-outs as a right, not a temporary arrangement until they find work again. Professional landlords in the South of England are charging sky-high rents, paid for by the local authorities (i.e. the tax-payers) and getting away with it. These benefit recipients are living far better than most people in, for instance, Hong Kong, where extended families share a small apartment.

It's about time the pressure was turned up on the LTU (long term unemployed) by the local authorities. Economies could be made by putting these people in hostels - one family per room, shared kitchens, toilets - and saving those paying local taxes a small fortune. Also this would free up many houses and apartments to be rented privately and the additional availability should bring down the rents. A winning scheme for all those in work, paying taxes.

Not sure what you mean, though, by "I didn't realise it was as bad as that."

As bad as what?

I think a few people twigged it.

Enlighten me, please.

Here is another case. On the face of it, it's a straight forward case of a taxi driver being convicted of rape. The judge in the case opined that no woman is safe in a minicab. I wonder how many would agree with this statement if polled?

The Old Bailey heard that Assadullah, from Plaistow, East London, set himself up as a cab driver by buying a false driving licence for £200 and using a false name. Police checks revealed he was driving without insurance.

Further inquiries into the rapist's firm revealed that each of its 32 drivers was working illegally in some way - either through their immigration status or by claiming benefit while working.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-170276/No-woman-safe-minicab-says-rape-judge.html#ixzz2ZTZfc9a2
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

This is the UK in a microcosm. The article goes on to state there is little incentive for taxi firm owners to check their workers as most are self-employed. Regulation of taxi firms was recommended 5 years ago and nothing has happened. How many drivers are illegal immigrants? How many are unlicensed? How many are claiming benefits? Of course with total abdication of control there are no centralized statistics for sociologists to use in order to point out to the British public the error of their ways.

Ok then B, but the use of the term rape is strong, so report it. Although sentences poorly reflect the act it is the law, only the individual or a cause can change it. Remember Kaisan, small steps and all that!!

I would need to report just about everyone that lives around me. Please excuse me if I choose not to do so, especially in light of the fact that they invariably receive no punishment whatsoever.

Hold that against me if you wish. I would prefer though that you held it against the successive governments that talked the talk and didn't walk the walk.

Incidentally, I live in Bridgeton, Glasgow.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2143850/Glasgow-neighbourhood-9-10-adults-welfare-crowned-benefits-capital-Britain.html

Ok then B, but the use of the term rape is strong, so report it. Although sentences poorly reflect the act it is the law, only the individual or a cause can change it. Remember Kaisan, small steps and all that!!

I would need to report just about everyone that lives around me. Please excuse me if I choose not to do so, especially in light of the fact that they invariably receive no punishment whatsoever.

Hold that against me if you wish. I would prefer though that you held it against the successive governments that talked the talk and didn't walk the walk.

Incidentally, I live in Bridgeton, Glasgow.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2143850/Glasgow-neighbourhood-9-10-adults-welfare-crowned-benefits-capital-Britain.html

I hold nothing against you B. I most definitely have an issue with successive government's but we have to take control of our own destiny or else it is a self perpetuating disaster.

Correct........they have to send out the right message, not mere platitudes. They need to make it a priority jailing offence. You'll see false claimants disappearing off benefits overnight.

Only if people report them.

If you knew someone had committed a burglary would you report them or would you just say it's the government's responsibility to do something about it?

Ok then B, but the use of the term rape is strong, so report it. Although sentences poorly reflect the act it is the law, only the individual or a cause can change it. Remember Kaisan, small steps and all that!!

I would need to report just about everyone that lives around me. Please excuse me if I choose not to do so, especially in light of the fact that they invariably receive no punishment whatsoever.

Hold that against me if you wish. I would prefer though that you held it against the successive governments that talked the talk and didn't walk the walk.

Incidentally, I live in Bridgeton, Glasgow.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2143850/Glasgow-neighbourhood-9-10-adults-welfare-crowned-benefits-capital-Britain.html

If you know of someone committing benefit fraud and you don't report it then it's not the Government's fault that that crime continues. The government have provided you with a method of reporting benefit fraud. It's up to you to use it:

https://secure.dwp.gov.uk/benefitfraud/

As far as living in Bridgeton is concerned you can't extrapolate the situation there to all other parts of the UK.

As far as living in Bridgeton is concerned you can't extrapolate the situation there to all other parts of the UK.

I've read that linked to article five times now; and still can't find any reference in it to benefit fraud.

As far as living in Bridgeton is concerned you can't extrapolate the situation there to all other parts of the UK.

I've read that linked to article five times now; and still can't find any reference in it to benefit fraud.

Of course not. He's making it up, to give credence to his bigoted theories. i'm surprised he hasn't called you a troll yet, that is his usual tactic at this stage of the debate!

^^ Pathetic.

Ok then B, but the use of the term rape is strong, so report it. Although sentences poorly reflect the act it is the law, only the individual or a cause can change it. Remember Kaisan, small steps and all that!!

I would need to report just about everyone that lives around me. Please excuse me if I choose not to do so, especially in light of the fact that they invariably receive no punishment whatsoever.

Hold that against me if you wish. I would prefer though that you held it against the successive governments that talked the talk and didn't walk the walk.

Incidentally, I live in Bridgeton, Glasgow.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2143850/Glasgow-neighbourhood-9-10-adults-welfare-crowned-benefits-capital-Britain.html

If you know of someone committing benefit fraud and you don't report it then it's not the Government's fault that that crime continues. The government have provided you with a method of reporting benefit fraud. It's up to you to use it:

https://secure.dwp.gov.uk/benefitfraud/

As far as living in Bridgeton is concerned you can't extrapolate the situation there to all other parts of the UK.

How many boroughs do you think there are like Bridgeton in the UK? Where the majority of people are on benefits?

When was the last time you reported anyone for anything sustento?

There are many people doing work for themselves whileon benefits. They are not necessarily breaking the law, many are not earning enough to support themselves and their families without these benefits.

What I object to are the ones who refuse jobs that are offered, because the hours are too long / the work is too hard / they think they'll lose money by working / the work is demeaning. And then spend the afternoon in the betting shop and the evening in the pub. I see the same half-dozen doing this every day near where I live. We have a dozen shops within a couple of minutes walk of my house - Corals and Ladbrokes (betting shops), Tesco Express, Martins the newsagent, Boots and Kumar Pharmacy, two charity shops and an Indian and a Chinese chippy. So it's what may be a a bit of a blight, but there are no empty shops. These same men have been there virtually every day in the past year, when I go to Tesco or the local library. And they are all within the employment age, look fit, but just stand around, seldom talking to each other, just go into the bookies every so often for the next race, then lounge around smoking. Their lives must be dreadful.