Why working is for pillocks.

I was directed by someone to an article in the London Standard about a bogus asylum seeker (to be found here: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23912590-gang-rape-asylum-seeker-jailed-for-pound-250000-benefits-fraud.do )

This charming woman came here all the way from Somalia, with her six kids, claiming asylum because her family had been attacked and murdered and she herself had been raped. Clearly deserving of asylum and help, yes? Well she would be, if it hadn’t all been so much bullshit. What she’d actually come here (via that well known warzone, Sweden) to do is claim from our shiny lovely benefits system. Something that she clearly has a knack for, given that between 2004 and 2010 she raked in just over £260k (having already got £50k out of the Swedish authorities).

Now my maths isn’t the greatest but let’s have a go at some sums shall we?

Benefits are tax free, so what would you have to earn in order to wind up with that much in your pocket? Assuming a tax free allowance of £6k and tax paid at 20% on the first £37k then 40% on the subsequent amount, I make it £354,200 over six years before tax. Or, if you prefer, a salary of £59,033.33 per annum.

I can tell you without fear of revealing my salary that it isn’t anywhere near this amount. Not even slightly. I can also say with 99% certainty that to get this cash Ms Muse did not ever have to get up at 6am then go and stand on a shitworks in the snow while the morning turds of rural Lancashire sailed merrily by.

And this folks, is why working is for pillocks.  You do dull or unpleasant jobs with people who frequently get right on your nerves in order to be awarded far less money than Miss Muse has raked in and then to add insult to injury, the government remove a portion of it to pay Miss Muse her £59k a year and allow her to live in a house in Neasden that you’ll never ever be able to afford.

I’m all for helping those in need, those who require a helping hand, those who are ill and those whose circumstances have changed through no fault of their own however I am not for paying tax in order to support idle fuckers who come all the way here to take the piss out of the system. So, what I propose is this – pop Miss Muse back on the plane to Somalia and let’s see her try and swindle £250k out of their authorities. Just to prove I’m not mean or malicious, I’ll even give her a sandwich and a packet of crisps for the journey, you can’t say fairer than that now can you?

Advertisements

21 Responses

  1. Don’t blame you for being pissed about that one Vicola. That angers the hell out of me too, especially since I am one of those that is truly in need of the help and have felt guilty for getting what little I do get. I’ve worked all of my life and put money into the system and now they’ve cut everything down tremendously in the states because of all the fraud that has gone on in the past. People like this have damned near caused the “system” to go broke. I agree, put her back on the plane.

    • If she were genuine I wouldn’t suggest anything of the sort but she isn’t and money which could be used to help people that really need it is being squandered. It really annoys me. The selfishness of some people knows no bounds.

  2. So you FINALLY figured out how to use the shiny new laptop?

    Ditto to what ladywise said. Those who really need the help don’t get it, but the indolent do.

    • I had a bit of a dry writing spell GOM! It is a lovely shiny new laptop, it’s red.

      Over here the services for the elderly mentally infirm are a disgrace. Daycare centres have closed left right and centre and respite care is pretty much non existent outside of the charity sector. Why? Because there isn’t enough money to run them all. £250k given to this fake asylum seeker who has made up her story and come here because we give more cash than Sweden could give families a day’s respite from caring for a disabled relative once day a week for a year. But it isn’t, because it’s going to some cheeky bitch who thinks the UK is cash cow.

  3. I wonder why she left the Swedish war zone? Is their support system less generous?

    If so the trick is to go a couple of bucks under theirs and Miss Muse will have plenty of time to work out the math.

    When you think how much more good could be done in Somalia with that sort of money it seems very unbalanced.

    • Doesn’t it just? Or the amount of good that could be done here as well, it could give a genuine asylum seeker a home, re-training to allow them to find work and counselling to get over what they’ve experienced. To claim these appalling things have happened to you when they haven’t is truly disgusting, especially when in Somalia they ARE happening to women every day.

  4. Winds me up even more!
    I’m having to struggle on the dole with reduced housing benefits and I have never been out of work before!
    I used to pay a huge amount of tax and now I’m struggling a bit I feel like I’m a criminal whilst some people seem to know how to play the system and live lavish lifestyles!

    • That seems to be the trick, knowing how to play the system. Some people have really done their homework. And she came here from Sweden, which seems to me to be against the rules of asylum anyway, aren’t you meant to claim it in the first safe country you arrive at?

  5. I have two problems with this: firstly, there’s next to no information about what exactly she has been convicted as. The whole article- and others I have found- seems to just assume we’ll understand how terrible she is on account of being an asylum seeker (turned recognised refugee). Secondly, there seems to be some suspicion that she’s actually Kenyan- and of course we all have our bad apples. Every state has it’s criminals. I feel annoyed reading this article as it gives so little useful information and just seems to rest on the usual “asylum seekers coming here to use our benefits system” rhetoric. Yes, clearly she’s been convicted of fraud- but one thing I’d really like to know is whether this is in any way linked to her asylum application and the lies she appears to have told while making that. The article is highly emotive in it’s language and not I feel at all helpful for telling us what really she has done.

    • Agreed. This story is from a sister paper of the Daily Mail, and we all know that they never let truth get in the way of a good story, especially when it means they can bash asylum seekers. Most asylum seekers live below the poverty line in houses that no-one else wants. These stories just serve to whip up anger and misery, even more so at a time when most of us are suffering from the Tory government’s cuts.

      • But she isn’t an asylum seeker. She’s a FAKE asylum seeker who made up her story and arrived in the UK after being in Sweden for months. You’re not telling me she was in danger in Sweden. She’s come here because you get more cash. It’s women like this who give the genuine asylum seekers who have come here to build a safe and secure future for themselves a bad name. It’s obtaining money by deception and takes needed funds away from people who really require them. That money could give several young carers a day’s respite once a week for a year. It could provide new hips for elderly patients. It could provide cancer care. It could provide an electric wheelchair for a disabled person or prosthetic limbs for an amputee. Or, it could be given to someone who has heard the UK is giving away free cash and has made up a story to get access to it. These things she claim happened to her which are in doubt because the dates don’t add up are happening to women in Somalia every day which is what really annoys me, there are so many women out there who need our help, really require rescuing from desperate circumstances and these huge sums of money are being handed out to bogus claimants instead of being used to get women in real danger out of warzones to safety.

    • The way I read it, the point of the article is that she’s NOT an asylum seeker, she made up her story in order to get over here. The rules of asylum are such that you’re meant to claim it in whichever safe haven you arrive at first. Given that she was in Sweden for months she hasn’t done this as Sweden can’t exactly be described as a dangerous place. I suspect that the undertone of the article is that those who aren’t genuine asylum seekers are heading over here from everywhere, including safe countries, because you can get more here than elsewhere. I dont’ have any issue with asylum seekers, we’re a wealthy country and we should as a matter of course take in, support and allow to make their own independent life those from other countries who require assistance. What I don’t agree with is economic migrants who have heard that you can make shitloads of cash doing sod all in the UK heading here to sponge. Cuts are being made everywhere and women like this are taking money from the genuinely needy by deception, while giving genuine asylum seekers a bad name to boot.

      • I see what you’re saying, however that’s just not the way these articles work. There’s so much stirring over asylum seekers / over refugees / over immigrants coming here, that we’d be naive to think this is so very different. And why is this woman not being called a British Citizen – which she apparently is – why still an asylum seeker? It’s because as an “asylum seeker” she’s an easy target; she plays to a media love of stirring things for vulnerable people. This is not the first tabloid piece on an asylum seeker / refugee / immigrant taking loads of benefits for their big families and never working. It’s one of many. And studies have shown too that the British public finds it very difficult to differentiate between asylum seekers / failed asylum seekers / undocumented migrants / recognised refugees / etc. The whole thing is confused.

        What’s the most relevant thing here – that she’s defrauded the benefits system, or that she’s a former asylum seeker? There are a lot of benefits cheats in this country, and people who take money without ever dreaming of earning their own. But this one’s a pesky asylum seeker, hey? Do you not see where I’m coming from with this?

        Incidentally, the Swedish link appears to be that she was a refused asylum seeker in Sweden. There are many reasons why refugee status determination is unfair and inaccurate. After being refused asylum in Sweden, she would have had a gap of several years to disguise if wishing to make a new asylum claim – under a different, necessary, identity – else she wouldn’t have been given asylum in the UK. I don’t know the details of her case to know what kind of benefits fraud she committed. I would really like to know, however, if she’s been convicted in relation to the lies – that she will have needed to have told – in connection with her asylum application. The fact is, I refuse to get up in arms about yet another tabloid headline about an asylum seeker who has told lies and taken money… Because there’s just so much wrong with the asylum system here that people need to make things up to get anywhere. I don’t know how far she went. I don’t know if she’s the type of swine who puts in applications for money to several state agencies involving multiple names, etc. None of us knows. But I do know that the tabloids love to stir.

      • It’s diffcult to seperate the fact that she was an asylum seeker with the fact that she’s defrauded the system because one couldn’t have happened without the other. You’re right, the tabloids do like to stir, especially about asylum seekers but the fact that you can receive that amount of cash and benefits at all wants looking at in itself. It’s a huge sum and I’d be interested to see how it’s broken down. The problem I have with her is the same one I have with the home grown scratters we’ve got who’ve been ‘on the sick’ for 10 years despite being able to play football and go jogging, the abuse of the system. It’s rife. Native British, asylum seekers, economic migrants, there’s people taking the piss left right and centre and in a time of cuts when the money for the genuinely needy is being squeezed, it needs clamping down on hard. Otherwise real asylum seekers, real ill people, the disabled and the elderly are going to suffer badly.

  6. I accept what you’re saying and I know exactly where you’re coming from. I’m sure you’re aware of my views (based on my experience of having two very lazy close relatives) on people taking advantage of the welfare system. My point still stands on this being an inflammatory article about “an asylum seeker”, however. Yes, her refugee background is relevant to the article… but asylum seeker is a legal category and wrongly used in this article. It begins “An asylum seeker who claimed she had been gang-raped…” – but she’s not an asylum seeker. Not that this matters to the writer of this or the very many word-for-word copies out in a bunch of similar rags (shown on the Internet).

    My question, when I hear about asylum seekers allegedly falsifying their claims to stay in a country is this: why? There’s a rumour she’s Kenyan – there’s also persecution in Kenya but it’s far less likely to be recognised than persecution in Somalia. It might be, however, that she’s actually from Somalia (not just by descent)… but her apparently failed asylum claim in Sweden means, as I’ve said above, that she would have needed to have made something up.

    But coming back to the point that we share in common, I’ll say this: integrating into this economy as a first generation immigrant, from a very deprived country, with several children to care for (single parent too?) is notoriously difficult. And the government does next to nothing to help. It just points the finger when people end up on benefits.

    Overall, there’s a lot of guesswork going on here. Inevitably. I stand by my original points about this particular article. It’s inflammatory and fundamentally another attack on asylum seekers/refugees/”who-cares-what-category-they’re-from” – even though I know this isn’t the argument that you are about making.

    • It is an attack on asylum seekers, certainly, but in this case the article got it wrong – if she lied about where she was from and what had happened to her in order to get into the UK, get citizenship and get benefits then she wasn’t an asylum seeker in the first place, she was an economic migrant. The media does have a wildly annoying tendency to lump the two together as ‘money-grubbing foreigners’ which is grossly unfair to asylum seekers. There is a chance that she’s suffered somewhere and if that is the case then I have unfairly maligned her and I apologise. However there’s an equally large chance that she has claimed to be from a war torn shitpit so she could gain a better standard of living here than she could wherever she was actually from. While I can’t say I blame her for grabbing at the chance where she could, that’s not what the asylum system is for. We can’t take on everyone who wants a Western standard of living and maybe the government could do more to help asylum seekers if the money wasn’t being stretched to cover those who aren’t genuinely eligible as well as those who are.

  7. I don’t want to get all Daily Mail, but I can’t help wondering what the ratio is, those caught defrauding the system vs those not caught defrauding the system.

    But benefits fraud aside, this is a hideously unpleasant woman who lied to the Swedes about her past and her circumstances, and then came here and lied to the UK about her past and her circumstances.

    I can’t help thinking that as long as the penalties continue to be no real deterrent, these benefit frauds will continue. Our benefits systems are rubbish, contain no real checks or balances. Such a shame.

  8. I’ve got to get myself a brand new red laptop if they all work as well as yours Vicola.

    We get entire boatloads of well-heeled asylum seekers turning up on our doorstep in hired boats, and when authorities determine they are NOT genuine refugees STOOPID Australia then pays for lawyers to help them launch legal appeal proceedings.

    Sometimes I despair.

  9. I say they get their money back before they let her go. Good kidneys are going for a fair amount these days as well as a few other non-vital organs and pieces parts…

  10. Well said. It’s time more people in parliament had the balls to start telling it like it is.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: