Would you accept having your bank account checked?

Tonawanda17

Yes Albus, you are correct. There is no limit for CB, just income based. I just mean that if someone has lots in the bank (i don't) then i don't see how they can complain about what they spend the money on as long as they are entitled to it in the first place. Thanks for all your support

poppy123456

Albus_Scope said:

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

That's correct. Also pensions of up to £85/week are ignored. As well as earnings from a partner you maybe living with.

WhatThe

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

Watched some of the Lords debate - DWP will report its business in a letter to the Lords.. so yes, we must wait!

Steve_in_The_City

What I spend my spondoolies on is my concern and no one else. Benefits should not be called benefits but entitlements. I have paid in to the system and I am not going to let anyone tell me what I can or cannot spend my spondoolies on. 

MW123

I am confident that even if the proposed legislation is enacted, Scope members will not face any adverse consequences. I see no evidence suggesting that every individual receiving Universal Credit will undergo monthly bank account checks.  For further clarification, please refer to this link directly from the government website.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fighting-fraud-in-the-welfare-system/fighting-fraud-in-the-welfare-system--2

Jimm_Alumni

I want to cover something that was brought up quite a bit ago in this discussion. That because 50% of people want something that means it should be done because "democracy".

What you're describing is tyranny of the majority. Democracy should be balanced so minorities are not disadvantaged or silenced. 

The government is supposed to be the in-between to ensure the entire populace is heard, not just the majority groups. Just because 50% of people want something does not make it good. Especially if those 50% have never experienced the situation they are making a decision on. Politics and governance is a complex and nuanced topic. That's why we elect people to research and try to decide what is best for the entire country.

It's also why populism is often looked down upon. It can lead to a tyranny of the majority situation.

Tonawanda17

Hi. Is this actually going to happen?

judie

Jimm_Scope said:

I want to cover something that was brought up quite a bit ago in this discussion. That because 50% of people want something that means it should be done because "democracy".

What you're describing is tyranny of the majority. Democracy should be balanced so minorities are not disadvantaged or silenced. 

The government is supposed to be the in-between to ensure the entire populace is heard, not just the majority groups. Just because 50% of people want something does not make it good. Especially if those 50% have never experienced the situation they are making a decision on. Politics and governance is a complex and nuanced topic. That's why we elect people to research and try to decide what is best for the entire country.

It's also why populism is often looked down upon. It can lead to a tyranny of the majority situation.

The survey is flawed anyway, it shouldn't be considered in any decision. Probably 50% of The Conservative Minister's Wives Club!😄

Jimm_Alumni

Tonawanda17 said:

Hi. Is this actually going to happen?

It is something the current government is *possibly considering according to a newspaper article but as of right now it isn't confirmed by the government I believe.

2oldcodgers

Tonawanda17 said:

Yes Albus, you are correct. There is no limit for CB, just income based. I just mean that if someone has lots in the bank (i don't) then i don't see how they can complain about what they spend the money on as long as they are entitled to it in the first place. Thanks for all your support

At the moment they can't as long as your capital is less than £6000 for UC.
Over that figure then you should have already notified the DWP who will then reduce your benefit income accordingly.

2oldcodgers

letitbe said:

Paying cash into your account to cover DD isn’t really an indicator of working though , you could simply be borrowing money from people or gambling . They’d need absolute proof that you’re working either by observation or actual monies paid into your account by a company. 

Again they’d need to know what your standard of living is, if your getting standard UC , have no savings and they question where u got your new BMW from or how you can afford multiple holidays a year then fair enough - you’d need to explain yourself. 

spending your benefits on what you want is no business of the DWP , working and not declaring , having over the savings limit is. 

But it is a good reason for the DWP to look more closely at you.

2oldcodgers

judie said:

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

Yes as well as through retirement. The choices are debated and voted on by the representatives that each one of us votes into power as a MP. I don't see anything wrong in checking that (a) you don't have any previously unreported sources of income and (b) that the government has a right to know how you are spending the money it hands to you.
If you earn it than you do have the right of choice of what you spend it on but if it is being given for the purposes of keeping you out of poverty..........

Ralph

2oldcodgers said:

judie said:

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

Yes as well as through retirement. The choices are debated and voted on by the representatives that each one of us votes into power as a MP. I don't see anything wrong in checking that (a) you don't have any previously unreported sources of income and (b) that the government has a right to know how you are spending the money it hands to you.
If you earn it than you do have the right of choice of what you spend it on but if it is being given for the purposes of keeping you out of poverty..........

So who decides what is ”good” spending and what is “bad”? Do we have thousands of people going through people’s accounts with lists and saying oh Ralph spent £500 on a new tv he could have got one for £250 or I see he’s ordered a takeaway meal. That’s banned. 

This is 1984 stuff. 

Wibbles

2oldcodgers said:

judie said:

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

Yes as well as through retirement. The choices are debated and voted on by the representatives that each one of us votes into power as a MP. I don't see anything wrong in checking that (a) you don't have any previously unreported sources of income and (b) that the government has a right to know how you are spending the money it hands to you.
If you earn it than you do have the right of choice of what you spend it on but if it is being given for the purposes of keeping you out of poverty..........

Personal Independence Payment (PIP) is extra money to help you with everyday life if you've an illness, disability or mental health condition. 
So who decides what that actually means? 

judie

2oldcodgers said:

judie said:

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

Yes as well as through retirement. The choices are debated and voted on by the representatives that each one of us votes into power as a MP. I don't see anything wrong in checking that (a) you don't have any previously unreported sources of income and (b) that the government has a right to know how you are spending the money it hands to you.
If you earn it than you do have the right of choice of what you spend it on but if it is being given for the purposes of keeping you out of poverty..........

😆 I am in poverty! I don't object to random checks to check for fraud, that is the power the DWP already possess. I object to being discriminated against because of my disability by being monitored monthly. Fraud exists in the wider world, as has been pointed out several times, so why isn't everyone's bank account checked monthly for suspicious activity? It is still taking tax payer money from the treasury which is your objection as I understand it 

Jimm_Alumni

I see the logic behind the government checking for fraud (a), though I disagree with this method. I cannot see why the government should ever know how you are spending the money (b). It is not up to them to decide what is right or wrong. It's very dystopian and invasive. The government often loses data (they don't pay very well for cybersecurity specialists like the private sector does, which costs them more in the long run), the government can even send the data to third parties (even without knowing themselves, see recent issues with the NHS contracting Meta for certain online tools without realising they were sharing medical records).

And most importantly, why should they know? That's incredibly invasive. Shall I next be mandated what food I can eat? If I buy tofu will I now be a part of the "tofu-eating wokerati" according to the Home Office Secretary and be deemed I need to be more closely watched by other governmental bodies?

It's harder to take away such access to your data once they have it. Can you trust every single future government to agree with you on what is "right" to spend money on? Can you trust every single future government to not mishandle the data?

poppy123456

2oldcodgers said:

judie said:

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

(b) that the government has a right to know how you are spending the money it hands to you.

Umm no, they do not! it's not their business what anyone spends their income on, regardless of whether it's benefits or earned income.

poppy123456

letitbe said:

Jimm_Scope said:

I see the logic behind the government checking for fraud (a), though I disagree with this method. I cannot see why the government should ever know how you are spending the money (b). It is not up to them to decide what is right or wrong. It's very dystopian and invasive. The government often loses data (they don't pay very well for cybersecurity specialists like the private sector does, which costs them more in the long run), the government can even send the data to third parties (even without knowing themselves, see recent issues with the NHS contracting Meta for certain online tools without realising they were sharing medical records).

And most importantly, why should they know? That's incredibly invasive. Shall I next be mandated what food I can eat? If I buy tofu will I now be a part of the "tofu-eating wokerati" according to the Home Office Secretary and be deemed I need to be more closely watched by other governmental bodies?

It's harder to take away such access to your data once they have it. Can you trust every single future government to agree with you on what is "right" to spend money on? Can you trust every single future government to not mishandle the data?

Have DWP actually released anything that says they will be monitoring what we spend benefits on ? 

No, they haven't. It's all speculation.

2oldcodgers

Ralph said:

So who decides what is ”good” spending and what is “bad”? Do we have thousands of people going through people’s accounts with lists and saying oh Ralph spent £500 on a new tv he could have got one for £250 or I see he’s ordered a takeaway meal. That’s banned. 

This is 1984 stuff. 

Let me explain.
The government departments do.
It is already standard procedure if you are bankrupt. The law allows the Insolvency Dept to question how you came to be bankrupt and what have been your spending actions since.
You are going too far, but the same law should be expanded to other departments. However it is used is up to that department to decide.
The principle is that the law should be there to investigate excessive and inappropriate spending if the money given to you comes from public funds.
This could well be a part of the benefit loan or advance procedure.

2oldcodgers

Wibbles said:

Personal Independence Payment (PIP) is extra money to help you with everyday life if you've an illness, disability or mental health condition. 
So who decides what that actually means? 

No it's not given to you to help with every day life. It's an amount that is to be used to cover the extra costs that occur due to the disability.