Benefit Fraud

[teletubby 1]

i can asure you that government departments do work together.

winz works closely with I.R.D, darterbase and matches up people on benefits that are also paying, paye taxes.

it is also the way they catch up with fathers dodging payments for there children they have fathered.

cyf as i have stated don't work with anyone unless it is to there advantage,they think they are a law above all others.. and don't have to answer to anyone..but if you want back up on departments working with each other contact paula bennett's office..you will find they will ditto what i said.

[teletubby 1]

and yes you will get the bulls rush from these departments..non will ever admit they are in the wrong or not done things professionally the way things should be done..

corruption within the system is not a one sided affair... people on benefits are just part of it..ask the minister how often the corruption comes from within her departments...

[Lindsay Joyce 2]

I have never proposed to have children taken from their family,understand that.As the people concerned know they have done wrong and don't want to correct it,it is my obligation as a citizen to notify the authorities so they can be put on to their correct entitlements.Is that to hard for you to comprehend?There are 8 childrens future on the line here,and I am sure their choice would not have been bought into this world to be bought up with not much hope of a future.I do agree with you that this issue is not large on the country's economy,but it is not helping the genuine people seeking assistance.It is like a jigsaw,this piece put in its right place is closer to completing the whole jigsaw.Try considering that the benifit money was your own personel money,would your attitude still be the same?I think not.

id be thinking DONT waste your effort on this TOPIC and start channeling it towards the curruption of Government, mas Ive mentioned mr No name

[myk 4]

id be thinking DONT waste your effort on this TOPIC and start channeling it towards the curruption of Government, mas Ive mentioned mr No name

If I was you,I would not consider thinking,it sounds like its not something you do often, and I would hate to see you have a brain explosion.You keep on supporting people ripping off the TAXPAYER.By the look of your grammar,you were like the children I am concerned about,you were not sent to school when you should have been.At least you were taught how to spell your name,you would know how to sign documents to give you income.

[macduff 0]

I am not making a judgement against those who are claiming a legitimate benefit.

I am making a judgement against those who are rorting the benefit system.

Big difference.

So I am not sure why you are trying to defend these people.

When the domestic purposes benifit was introduced it was meant to help mothers who were left destitute by their husbands, It was never intended to provide a lifestyle choice for single mothers who chose to become pregnant to multible partners. Likewise acc was intrduced to help accident victims who would otherwise have to take court action for compensation. Both were very worthy causes but human nature being what it is the whole thing was rorted by bludgers and the genuine claiments have been demonised as a result.

[Lindsay Joyce 2]

If I was you,I would not consider thinking,it sounds like its not something you do often, and I would hate to see you have a brain explosion.You keep on supporting people ripping off the TAXPAYER.By the look of your grammar,you were like the children I am concerned about,you were not sent to school when you should have been.At least you were taught how to spell your name,you would know how to sign documents to give you income.

FUNNY KIDS DONT RIP OFF THE SYSTEM- there parents do, which I dont like either... ummm but mr or MRS no name forget this thread if u want 2 help people- go to the one I said

[myk 4]

FUNNY KIDS DONT RIP OFF THE SYSTEM- there parents do, which I dont like either... ummm but mr or MRS no name forget this thread if u want 2 help people- go to the one I said

You're slowly understanding,I heard Paula Bennett state last night that her portfolio includes a budget of 26 Billion a year.Now if 1% of the 26billion is ripped off by recipients,that is 260 million a year and you want to blame it to anyone else but the recievers of the benefit.Are you now understanding my concerns?

[Lindsay Joyce 2]

You're slowly understanding,I heard Paula Bennett state last night that her portfolio includes a budget of 26 Billion a year.Now if 1% of the 26billion is ripped off by recipients,that is 260 million a year and you want to blame it to anyone else but the recievers of the benefit.Are you now understanding my concerns?

26 million sounds alot, but its peanuts in comparison in relation to what im talking about.

[Lindsay Joyce 2]

26 million sounds alot, but its peanuts in comparison in relation to what im talking about.

260 million sorry

[myk 4]

260 million sorry

You are 100% correct,a lot of cash.

[Lindsay Joyce 2]

You are 100% correct,a lot of cash.

agree, but a pitence, as I mentioned

[myk 4]

I received a reply on the above that I made to Ministry of Social Developement.They can not enlighten me much on any investigation they have made because of the privacy act.The alleged case worker of the lady concerned has no recollection of having any phone call with me,and on checking,Cyfs in this area have no person by the name I gave them residing in this area.If this is not a cover up,I am to silly too understand what a cover up is as the couple involved are still living the same lifestyle.They concluded by saying they would be disappointed if one of their staff told me to mind my own business and don't hesitate in future to notify them if I have concerns that somebody may be receiving their assistance to which they may not be entitled to.I don't think so,I will direct my original complaint directly to Paula Bennett.I rung the local office late this afternoon and got put through to the case officer I spoke with,as soon as I gave my name,the phone went dead.Be assured,I will not give up on this issue until I get the truth told.

[Rooboy 1]

I received a reply on the above that I made to Ministry of Social Developement.They can not enlighten me much on any investigation they have made because of the privacy act.The alleged case worker of the lady concerned has no recollection of having any phone call with me,and on checking,Cyfs in this area have no person by the name I gave them residing in this area.If this is not a cover up,I am to silly too understand what a cover up is as the couple involved are still living the same lifestyle.They concluded by saying they would be disappointed if one of their staff told me to mind my own business and don't hesitate in future to notify them if I have concerns that somebody may be receiving their assistance to which they may not be entitled to.I don't think so,I will direct my original complaint directly to Paula Bennett.I rung the local office late this afternoon and got put through to the case officer I spoke with,as soon as I gave my name,the phone went dead.Be assured,I will not give up on this issue until I get the truth told.

I believe you to be well meaning MYK, but perhaps a little confused. As I have pointed out previously, your first post makes in unclear who you actually phoned that first time? Was it a CYF worker or a WINZ worker? I reackon you phoned the woman's WINZ worker and have subsequently been dealing with CYF, and that's why they have no record of you calling.

And how did you get the woman's workers number in the first place? Those workers, be they WINZ or CYF, guard those phone numbers very carefully.

[myk 4]

I believe you to be well meaning MYK, but perhaps a little confused. As I have pointed out previously, your first post makes in unclear who you actually phoned that first time? Was it a CYF worker or a WINZ worker? I reackon you phoned the woman's WINZ worker and have subsequently been dealing with CYF, and that's why they have no record of you calling.

And how did you get the woman's workers number in the first place? Those workers, be they WINZ or CYF, guard those phone numbers very carefully.

Rooboy,I rung the local cyfs office and asked if this lady concerned was on their books,the operator said she was and would transfer me to her case manager,(the one who hung up on me yesterday).She told me to mind my own business and not to listen to gossip,and I told her the woman had told us all the details herself.Yesterday I asked the operator at Cyfs for the same ladys name as I spoke to earlier,she answered by giving her name,when I gave mine the phone went dead.So no,I don't think I'm confused,I think I'm being given the runaround.As for saying the lady is not now on their books,the lady and partner still live over the road and still not sending the kids to school.

[Rooboy 1]

Rooboy,I rung the local cyfs office and asked if this lady concerned was on their books,the operator said she was and would transfer me to her case manager,(the one who hung up on me yesterday).She told me to mind my own business and not to listen to gossip,and I told her the woman had told us all the details herself.Yesterday I asked the operator at Cyfs for the same ladys name as I spoke to earlier,she answered by giving her name,when I gave mine the phone went dead.So no,I don't think I'm confused,I think I'm being given the runaround.As for saying the lady is not now on their books,the lady and partner still live over the road and still not sending the kids to school.

OK MYK I'll accept you contacted CYF not WINZ. In that case you can go them on a number of details (which will make Teletubby happy).

1. The "Operator" you first spoke to broke the woman's entitlement to confidentiality by confirming to you on the phone that she was a client of CYF.

2. You gave the case worker information that a trespassed male was back residing with the family and she told you "not to gossip".

3. It then appears that the same case worker did not document your concern as she is supposed to do.

4. Now it appears they are being downright evasive and impolite, which is not befitting a public service the taxpayer funds.

Start by informing Paula Bennett of these four points and I reckon you'll make some waves.

[Guest Howcome]

handles every Auck/cambridge meeting. There is no constitenty in the rules of criminal convictions within the greyhound industry, it seems crime does pay and very well too....

A few months ago we had a lady with 8 kids under 12 move in near us.SHE told us she had come from a womans refuge and the house had been arranged for her by Cyfs,on the condition she take a trespass notice out against her partner,whom was the reason for her being in the refuge.Surprise,surprise,within a week she was joined by the partner who collects the dole,and SHE told us she gets just under $1400 a week DPB.She pays $200 a week rent which includes water in a 4 bdrm house.Last week this got too much for me as a taxpayer to accept any longer,as see she is pregnant again.So I rung Cyfs and spoke to the lady who is her case manager and expressed my concern of the partner living there and the income going into the house,and was told to keep my nose out of it and it had nothing to do with me.She said she didn't want to listen to gossip and I told her it was gospel,as it came from HER mouth.The call ended with me being told to consider the hardship this family have been through,and isn't it better to have a happy family together than worrying about someone getting a bit more benefit than their entitlement.No wonder this country is in the crap with this type of attitude.I intend calling Wgtn next week,surely this is not normal procedure when filing benefit fraud information and so many honest people are hurting?

[Grahame Noblet 2]

handles every Auck/cambridge meeting. There is no constitenty in the rules of criminal convictions within the greyhound industry, it seems crime does pay and very well too....

Any links to the above?

[Guest Howcome]

a trainer/handler that has benefit fraud convictions of over 100,000 and is yet to be sentenced. She handles and waves to judges regularly. Funny other criminals cant keep or get trainers/handlers licenses can they? there is not much integerity in the rules for one but not the same rules for others. I wonder if when sentenced on the 1st July if she will be able to still handle /train greyhiunds or even stay on the same propperty? Time will tell

Any links to the above?

[myk 4]

a trainer/handler that has benefit fraud convictions of over 100,000 and is yet to be sentenced. She handles and waves to judges regularly. Funny other criminals cant keep or get trainers/handlers licenses can they? there is not much integerity in the rules for one but not the same rules for others. I wonder if when sentenced on the 1st July if she will be able to still handle /train greyhiunds or even stay on the same propperty? Time will tell

Probably get permanent name suppression.

[Guest Howcome]

Disqualified trainers and handler/trainers on home detention ? makes a mockery of the basic club rules but then whats one year home detention i guess .. i wonder if the bracelet will let her get as far as Cambridge ?