Would you accept having your bank account checked?

Tonawanda17

Thanks albus. As you say nothing has been announced. How long would something like this usually take to put in place? Thank again

Albus_Scope

@Tonawanda17 I think that's like asking "How long is a piece of string?"   

Bettahm

Imho the govt would do it's best to turn the general public against us, maybe especially those with mh issues. 
Like this work is good for mh. It should be ensured we take our medication and attend talking therapies. 
Read that somewhere.
We are at risk of looking like benefit scroungers to the general public. 

Albus_Scope

Talking therapies are already overloaded with applicants from people with mental health issues, so this will just put added stress onto them.  Hopefully the government will look into more money for them at the very least as they are currently hugely under funded. 
  BUT at the same time, if people get more access to therapies for mental health concerns, I see this as a good thing.  But also, not all mental health issues can be dealt with just with free talking therapies or meds thrown at them.  So there's pros and cons here. 

But this is a conversation for another thread.    

Bettahm

Albus_Scope said:

Talking therapies are already overloaded with applicants from people with mental health issues, so this will just put added stress onto them.  Hopefully the government will look into more money for them at the very least as they are currently hugely under funded. 
  BUT at the same time, if people get more access to therapies for mental health concerns, I see this as a good thing.  But also, not all mental health issues can be dealt with just with free talking therapies or meds thrown at them.  So there's pros and cons here. 

But this is a conversation for another thread.    

Had 18 months on and off of talking therapies. They dont work for me.
Yes for another thread but do think the govt is trying to turn people against those with mh problems. Just mho.

OverlyAnxious

Long term practical peer support is far more useful than talking therapies imo.  I wish there had been more of that type of thing in my area 5-10 years ago. 

Oddly every service or forum I've tried to access over the years has prohibited any real life contact or detail exchanges.  I appreciate the need for safety, but this feels like another of those situations that's causing many people harm and only 'saving' very few. 

Of course, it's a moral dilemma as to whether it's better do everything possible to save one person, or whether it's better to help as many people as possible and accept that harm may come to a small minority...

Tonawanda17

Just found this in article about this topic :

"No legislation has yet been put forward by the DWP and many will hope that a general election intervenes and that these proposals never become anything more than the wish list of a failing department.

Any thoughts?

Albus_Scope

As said before, they're currently just ideas the current government have.  Nothing is set in stone. 

poppy123456

Tonawanda17 said:

Thanks albus. As you say nothing has been announced. How long would something like this usually take to put in place? Thank again

No one can possibly answer that question.

poppy123456

Tonawanda17 said:

Just found this in article about this topic :

"No legislation has yet been put forward by the DWP and many will hope that a general election intervenes and that these proposals never become anything more than the wish list of a failing department.

Any thoughts?

Any thoughts that people have will just be speculation. Nothing will happen any time soon. Please try to realax.

Tonawanda17

Hi, thanks very much poppy. I think i saw somewhere that this is to be announced at the next budget in a few weeks time? Thanks again

Albus_Scope

It "may" be announced.  Again, nothing has been finalised. 

2oldcodgers

letitbe said:

2oldcodgers said:

Biblioklept said:

Albus_Scope said:

Hi @Tonawanda17, it's currently all just speculation, it may not actually happen, so please try not to worry too much about this. 

It's sadly not that speculative https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/survey-of-public-perceptions-of-fraud-error-and-debt/survey-of-public-perceptions-of-fraud-error-and-debt-summary they're certainly moving in the direction

Apparently it's what the public want :eyeroll:

I am one that is for this to happen. The number of people that I am aware of that are working 'cash in hand' AND are claiming UC - either sickness or unemployment is becoming an acceptable way of life.
For those that are cheating by not disclosing their true capital level is not acceptable.

Isn’t a ‘cash in hand job’ exactly that ? In which case it wouldn’t show up in ur bank account. Am I being dim ? Or are cash in hand jobs paid into bank accounts too ? 

I always thought they could just look into ur account anyway . 

You would be surprised how many people actually pay in the cash into their account to cover outgoing DD's etc. There is also the question of being able to enjoy a standard of living that goes beyond what the level of 'known' income is.

No they don't look into accounts as such - only if there is reasonable suspicion that fraud is involved.

2oldcodgers

Kalps said:

Once again....the rich get richer and the poor carry on getting their teeth kicked in as a constant!!! And pushed around by DWP because we claim benefits due to unwanted illness/conditions. I would so love to see a disabled person become a millionaire or 1 with several enrol health conditions!! FFS!!! 

You might have unwanted illnesses but the money that the government gives you should be controlled via regular checks. Even my tax that I pay on my private and state pension is probably paid back out to some benefit claimant.

2oldcodgers

cymbalfern said:

I think the government should only investigate if they have valid reasons. I feel randomly checking on people would be an infringement of privacy & rights.

That is what they do at the moment. The question really is what should happen to those that keep quiet and  hide their illicit activities that would probably never get caught?
Because they are clever enough so as to avoid giving the DWP 'valid reasons' They should get away with it?

Albus_Scope

2oldcodgers said:

You might have unwanted illnesses but the money that the government gives you should be controlled via regular checks. Even my tax that I pay on my private and state pension is probably paid back out to some benefit claimant.

Tax is used for many things in your daily life, including helping to pay for other peoples pensions. 

2oldcodgers

Crazyone said:

I have nothing to hide but this feels like too much of an invasion of privacy, almost like having to show what is down my knickers to all and sundry. My banking and what I spend my money on is deeply personal, I mean we don't stand in the middle of Tesco and shout out to everyone all our banking details, well most of us don't, and that is what it would feel like, any random person (albeit working for the DWP), having access and questioning and us having to justify every little transaction that is perceived to be a non essential purchase.

They would simply be looking for items of expenditure that do not match known income.

judie

2oldcodgers said:

Kalps said:

Once again....the rich get richer and the poor carry on getting their teeth kicked in as a constant!!! And pushed around by DWP because we claim benefits due to unwanted illness/conditions. I would so love to see a disabled person become a millionaire or 1 with several enrol health conditions!! FFS!!! 

You might have unwanted illnesses but the money that the government gives you should be controlled via regular checks. Even my tax that I pay on my private and state pension is probably paid back out to some benefit claimant.

We all pay tax all our lives, it goes on a myriad of things, we have no choice in how it's spent

Tonawanda17

To me they can't stop someone on contribution based spending their money on what they want as their is no savings limit the person could have a big amount in the bank.

Albus_Scope

If you're claiming contribution based ESA, there's no savings cap I believe?