Social Welfare checks to see if your children really exist

Boombastic

I find this bizarre that they would start doing checks like this without prior information/suspicions something was not right. Can't they check the register of births and liaise with the passport office? I have no children (imaginary or otherwise:)) myself so it doesn't really apply to me but it strikes me as a bit of a waste of money, although perhaps, they will recover more than it costs. Anyone here been checked?



From the Irish Independent:

SOCIAL welfare inspectors are calling to the homes of families to check they are not falsely claiming child benefit.

The crackdown on abuse of the benefit has been stepped up significantly, with inspectors carrying out random checks and demanding proof the claimed-for children really exist.

Middle-class families and professionals including a Fine Gael TD are among those who have already been checked.

In all, as many as 1,000 are expected to be visited before Christmas.

They will be asked to provide passports or birth certificates for the children receiving social welfare at the address.

The checks are completely random and will hit families regardless of class or where they live and are not based on information about the likelihood of social welfare fraud in a household.

DarkJager

Sounds fair to me.

eth0

In my day the social welfare crowd knew how many children you had, and how many your father had, and what they're doing now. Now they rely on silly technological gimmicks to re-implement the big brother society of days goneby

In all, as many as 1,000 are expected to be visited before Christmas.

I'll have the tae ready for them

Mickey H

DarkJager wrote: »

Sounds fair to me.

Sounds reasonable to me too.

Youssef Chippo

What is it with Ireland and it's obsession with the Social Welfare system?

awec

Youssef Chippo wrote: »

What is it with Ireland and it's obsession with the Social Welfare system?

People hate the thought of being ripped off by fraudsters. Imagine that.

ResearchWill

Boombastic wrote: »

I find this bizarre that they would start doing checks like this without prior information/suspicions something was not right. Can't they check the register of births and liaise with the passport office? I have no children (imaginary or otherwise:)) myself so it doesn't really apply to me but it strikes me as a bit of a waste of money, although perhaps, they will recover more than it costs. Anyone here been checked?

SOCIAL welfare inspectors are calling to the homes of families to check they are not falsely claiming child benefit.

The crackdown on abuse of the benefit has been stepped up significantly, with inspectors carrying out random checks and demanding proof the claimed-for children really exist.

Middle-class families and professionals including a Fine Gael TD are among those who have already been checked.

In all, as many as 1,000 are expected to be visited before Christmas.

They will be asked to provide passports or birth certificates for the children receiving social welfare at the address.

The checks are completely random and will hit families regardless of class or where they live and are not based on information about the likelihood of social welfare fraud in a household.

Using birth registration and passport information could be in breach of data protection, as data can only be used for the purpose it was originally gathered. If I remember they did something like this a few years back and as general fraud detection goes it gives them a good sampling of possible fraud/error figures.

admiralofthefleet

DarkJager wrote: »

Sounds fair to me.

yep, completely fair. remember the scene in into the wast where the da was making up names in order to claim for them

Chucken

awec wrote: »

People hate the thought of being ripped off by fraudsters. Imagine that.

Well, they were voted in.

ResearchWill

admiralofthefleet wrote: »

yep, completely fair. remember the scene in into the wast where the da was making up names in order to claim for them

Or the urban legend of the Irish in England in the 1980's claiming under there English name, Irish name and many variations of both.

In relation to the OP the use of a 1000 in the sample would mean they can workout if it would be worth their while to check everyone in receipt of the payment, say the sample throws up 10% over payment that would be a lot of money as the total cost is some €2 billion then 10% would be €200 million that's a huge cut even 1% would be €20 million.

Chucken

Youssef Chippo wrote: »

What is it with Ireland and it's obsession with the Social Welfare system?

Dont you mean "After Hours" obsession??

smokedeels

Having recently spent some time in my local Welfare office, I was under the impression that bringing your kids along was already required.

Of course, you let them run wild, scream and climb sh1t just to show that they are nice and healthy.

Boombastic

DarkJager wrote: »

Sounds fair to me.

But you can reside here and claim for your children who are living in another country

If you are an EU/EEA citizen or a Swiss national and work in a country covered by EU Regulations, the country you work in usually pays Child Benefit even if your family is living in another country.


Will they be also randomly checking these people? why weren't the checks carried out when the child was born? - although circumstances can change. It's no bad thing if it cuts down on fraud.

Tombi!

Now this IS impressive.
So they can visit you at home unannounced to check if your kids are real but they can't answer the phones because they don't have the staff?

fasttalkerchat

The real reason is to stop separated parents claiming for children who live with their mother up North.

B.A._Baracus

Ah, yes.
Another anti-social move by the government. Of course, DarkJager and his follwers approve like mindless seals clapping for more fish...


Don't people ever think that this is all propaganda?
Its the people on the welfare thats the problem, right? - Even tho there are hardly any jobs out there.
Its not the government or the banks fault no more - its the people on the welfare that have the economy f**ked.

So the government keep coming out with the new schemes to catch "illegal" social fraud. While all they are doing, is blackening people on the social welfare to those who work. Whats this? divide and conquer?

girl2

Boombastic wrote: »

But you can reside here and claim for your children who are living in another country

If you are an EU/EEA citizen or a Swiss national and work in a country covered by EU Regulations, the country you work in usually pays Child Benefit even if your family is living in another country.


Will they be also randomly checking these people? why weren't the checks carried out when the child was born? - although circumstances can change. It's no bad thing if it cuts down on fraud.

Was gonna say the same thing.

MrTsSnickers

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

The real reason is to stop separated parents claiming for children who live with their mother up North.

Is that so widespread that it requires such a clamp down?

MadsL

ResearchWill wrote: »

Or the urban legend of the Irish in England in the 1980's claiming under there English name, Irish name and many variations of both.

Remember well two sisters both claiming under each others name whilst one studied in UK and the other worked in Ireland. One did the UK interview and then signed the form with her own name after completing the form in her sisters name. One phone call later she had them convinced it was a nickname since she was a child.

DarkJager

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

Ah, yes.
Another anti-social move by the government. Of course, DarkJager and his follwers approve like mindless seals clapping for more fish...


Don't people ever think that this is all propaganda?
Its the people on the welfare thats the problem, right? - Even tho there are hardly any jobs out there.
Its not the government or the banks fault no more - its the people on the welfare that have the economy f**ked.

So the government keep coming out with the new schemes to catch "illegal" social fraud. While all they are doing, is blackening people on the social welfare to those who work. Whats this? divide and conquer?

I'm not a dole basher at all so I'm not sure where you got that conclusion from? I am quite happy they are doing this though as I have absolutely no time or sympathy for fraudulent scumbags claiming for what they are not entitled to. Hope a few of those types get caught by checks like these and get taught a very hard lesson. Fuck those parasites.

Boombastic

ResearchWill wrote: »

Or the urban legend of the Irish in England in the 1980's claiming under there English name, Irish name and many variations of both.

In relation to the OP the use of a 1000 in the sample would mean they can workout if it would be worth their while to check everyone in receipt of the payment, say the sample throws up 10% over payment that would be a lot of money as the total cost is some €2 billion then 10% would be €200 million that's a huge cut even 1% would be €20 million.

Here is the results of their last test.

The last intensive child benefit fraud crackdown was carried out eight years ago, finding a much higher risk of fraud among non-Irish families.

About 14pc of 500 non-Irish families visited were making fraudulent child benefit claims, compared to 1.7pc of the 500 Irish families visited. The overall fraud rate was 2.3pc.

B.A._Baracus

DarkJager wrote: »

I'm not a dole basher at all so I'm not sure where you got that conclusion from? I am quite happy they are doing this though as I have absolutely no time or sympathy for fraudulent scumbags claiming for what they are not entitled to. Hope a few of those types get caught by checks like these and get taught a very hard lesson. Fuck those parasites.

I wont argue you with on fraudanlunt social claimers
Its just for me... its kinda 3 part:

- Obviously we know the government are doing this to cut back on the social bill. Targeting frauds in this case and one can say rightfully so.
- But also, the government are really going after people on the social too. People who are not recieving fraudanlunt social.
- and ... i just cant shake the propaganda feeling on this one. Why in recent months has it always been against the social? .. apart from that how come we dont hear about the government going after false tax submissions from self-employed people, etc.

hardCopy

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

DarkJager wrote: »

I'm not a dole basher at all so I'm not sure where you got that conclusion from? I am quite happy they are doing this though as I have absolutely no time or sympathy for fraudulent scumbags claiming for what they are not entitled to. Hope a few of those types get caught by checks like these and get taught a very hard lesson. Fuck those parasites.

I wont argue you with on fraudanlunt social claimers
Its just for me... its kinda 3 part:

- Obviously we know the government are doing this to cut back on the social bill. Targeting frauds in this case and one can say rightfully so.
- But also, the government are really going after people on the social too. People who are not recieving fraudanlunt social.
- and ... i just cant shake the propaganda feeling on this one. Why in recent months has it always been against the social? .. apart from that how come we dont hear about the government going after false tax submissions from self-employed people, etc.

These checks are being run against employed people, how is that targeting people on the social?

ceegee

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

Ah, yes.
Another anti-social move by the government. Of course, DarkJager and his follwers approve like mindless seals clapping for more fish...


Don't people ever think that this is all propaganda?
Its the people on the welfare thats the problem, right? - Even tho there are hardly any jobs out there.
Its not the government or the banks fault no more - its the people on the welfare that have the economy f**ked.

So the government keep coming out with the new schemes to catch "illegal" social fraud. While all they are doing, is blackening people on the social welfare to those who work. Whats this? divide and conquer?

You do realise that everyone gets child benefit? This has nothing to do with being unemployed

ResearchWill

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

I wont argue you with on fraudanlunt social claimers
Its just for me... its kinda 3 part:

- Obviously we know the government are doing this to cut back on the social bill. Targeting frauds in this case and one can say rightfully so.
- But also, the government are really going after people on the social too. People who are not recieving fraudanlunt social.
- and ... i just cant shake the propaganda feeling on this one. Why in recent months has it always been against the social? .. apart from that how come we dont hear about the government going after false tax submissions from self-employed people, etc.

Considering that every year revenue publish list of tax defaulters, and recent case of 6 years for garlic fraud, I think the goverenment do seriously go after tax issues.

Hasmunch

Oh crap.... any body got a lend of a few kids for a couple of days?
Kids will be returned in same condition they are recieved

B.A._Baracus

ceegee wrote: »

You do realise that everyone gets child benefit? This has nothing to do with being unemployed

You do realise unemployed people recieve child benefit too?

Boombastic

Hasmunch wrote: »

Oh crap.... any body got a lend of a few kids for a couple of days?
Kids will be returned in same condition they are recieved

No worries, the children don't actually have to be there as far as I can make out, once you have the paperwork

They will be asked to provide passports or birth certificates for the children receiving social welfare at the address.

Galwayguy35

Boombastic wrote: »

I find this bizarre that they would start doing checks like this without prior information/suspicions something was not right. Can't they check the register of births and liaise with the passport office? I have no children (imaginary or otherwise:)) myself so it doesn't really apply to me but it strikes me as a bit of a waste of money, although perhaps, they will recover more than it costs. Anyone here been checked?

SOCIAL welfare inspectors are calling to the homes of families to check they are not falsely claiming child benefit.

The crackdown on abuse of the benefit has been stepped up significantly, with inspectors carrying out random checks and demanding proof the claimed-for children really exist.

Middle-class families and professionals including a Fine Gael TD are among those who have already been checked.

In all, as many as 1,000 are expected to be visited before Christmas.

They will be asked to provide passports or birth certificates for the children receiving social welfare at the address.

The checks are completely random and will hit families regardless of class or where they live and are not based on information about the likelihood of social welfare fraud in a household.

If people have nothing to hide then there will be no problem.

Also what has class and the area a person lives in got to do with anything, I notice you mention it for some reason.

Should checks only be carried out on people who don't live in the leafy suburbs?

Boombastic

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

If people have nothing to hide then there will be no problem.

Also what has class and the area a person lives in got to do with anything, I notice you mention it for some reason.

Should checks only be carried out on people who don't live in the leafy suburbs?

I never mentioned class or leafy suburbs? Can you quote where I stated or implied that?

K-9

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

Now this IS impressive.
So they can visit you at home unannounced to check if your kids are real but they can't answer the phones because they don't have the staff?

No, they are targeting more resources at fraudulent claims, not answering a phone call.

ejmaztec

I see a business opportunity for a rapid response rent a kid service.

SW "I'd like to see Lorcan, Jacinta and Declan please"

Parent "I'll just go and get them, they're playing up the road"

Parent sneaks off to make urgent phone call.

3 minutes later, sound of helicopter.

Galwayguy35

Boombastic wrote: »

I never mentioned class or leafy suburbs? Can you quote where I stated or implied that?

Read your first post.

Boombastic

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Read your first post.

Yep and if you bothered to click the link you would see that it is a direct copy and paste from the Irish Independent for the bit linked starting 'Social Welfare Inspectors'


I will go back and clarify so people won't jump on making fraudulent claims

Tombi!

K-9 wrote: »

No, they are targeting more resources at fraudulent claims, not answering a phone call.

It says it's not based on if people are under investigation already and its' completely random.

I just find it stupid that they're claiming there's a lack of staff to properly answer phones and keep up with claims and so on but they can send people off to visit people in homes.

Boombastic

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

It says it's not based on if people are under investigation already and its' completely random.

I just find it stupid that they're claiming there's a lack of staff to properly answer phones and keep up with claims and so on but they can send people off to visit people in homes.

And they only want to see the childs documents, not the actual child - can these not be presented when collecting the benefit/ sent in?

Tombi!

Boombastic wrote: »

And they only want to see the childs documents, not the actual child - can these not be presented when collecting the benefit/ sent in?

Yeah, right. I'm sure that'll work.
"sorry, we don't have the staff; they're out trying to visit other people today. Call back in six months with the relevant document"

It's just another crack to look good and like the government is doing something about fraud.

Boombastic

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

Yeah, right. I'm sure that'll work.
"sorry, we don't have the staff; they're out trying to visit other people today. Call back in six months with the relevant document"

It's just another crack to look good and like the government is doing something about fraud.

They might be better focusing on their internal systems if this report published in 2011 is anything to go by:


"The study, entitled Tackling Social Welfare Fraud was published by the Oireachtas Library & Research Service on October 13th, 2011

It concluded that only 21.1 per cent of over-payments in the social welfare system were due to fraud, Dr Healy said. Some 69 per cent of overpayments in 2009 and 2010 were due to error, that report found."




But then again they've probably sorted this by now;)

Stinicker

Anybody remember that film "Into the West" where the social welfare inspector comes onto the Halting site and basically the traveller family is claiming for 22 children? The children were from different families but were being used to claim children's allowance for each family!

I wonder if something like this will be found in real life? I have heard from a priest who is a friend of my mothers about where some families get their children baptized several times and can then use the baptismal cert to get a birth cert allowing their children to have multiple identitys and claim several childrens allowances for each identity, each child can then claim several dole payments when he or she comes of age. The same priest was doing two christenings one day and was filling in for a different priest somewhere else and after doing the first christening found the same child back at the different parish for his second christening. I wonder if such a loophole still exists? As these children were supposedly home births I think the baptismal cert was taken as proof of birth and could then be used to get a birth certificate and an identity.

ArtSmart

Supposing your brat is annoyed with you and says 'Mister, I'm don't know these people - they asked me to cut the grass, that's all I know'.

what then?

Boombastic

ArtSmart wrote: »

Supposing your brat is annoyed with you and says 'Mister, I'm don't know these people - they asked me to cut the grass, that's all I know'.

what then?

They ask the child can they see his tax returns:pac:

ArtSmart

lol, some of the posts. this is nonsense folks, utter bile/ media muck.


legally alone, it'd be a fracking nightmare.


"for the love of God, will someone please think of the children."



sigh, and i had held such high esteem for AH.

Capt'n Midnight

ArtSmart wrote: »

Supposing your brat is annoyed with you and says 'Mister, I'm don't know these people - they asked me to cut the grass, that's all I know'.

what then?

Let the inspectors take the urchin away

ArtSmart

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

Yeah, right. I'm sure that'll work.
"sorry, we don't have the staff; they're out trying to visit other people today. Call back in six months with the relevant document"

It's just another crack to look good and like the government is doing something about fraud.

'sactly.


utter reg flag, reds under de beds, manic media mush.


we're better than this folks, aren't we?



(em, that's a rhetorical (sexy) question)

ArtSmart

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Let the inspectors take the urchin away

ah...perchance to dream....


sigh. knowing my luck the little bugger will find his way back - just before tea time.

Mickey H

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Let the inspectors take the urchin away

Or get him to finish cutting the grass.

K-9

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

It says it's not based on if people are under investigation already and its' completely random.

I just find it stupid that they're claiming there's a lack of staff to properly answer phones and keep up with claims and so on but they can send people off to visit people in homes.

I know, people moan there aren't enough investigating and when they do, they'll find something else to moan about.

Tombi!

K-9 wrote: »

I know, people moan there aren't enough investigating and when they do, they'll find something else to moan about.

I wasn't moaning though. I was pointing out the funny fact that they're using the lack of people working as to why phone calls get ignored/things take too long to put through in the offices but seem to find the staff to go out checking for kids.

Pherekydes

How does producing a birth cert prove that the child exists? You've already produced the same cert to claim for the kid in the first place.

Tombi!

Pherekydes wrote: »

How does producing a birth cert prove that the child exists? You've already produced the same cert to claim for the kid in the first place.

You have to do that?

Pherekydes

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

You have to do that?

It seems not, though I recall doing it a long time ago (c.1987). Maybe they changed the rules.


Anyway, my point still stands: a birth cert is not proof of existence.