Families where no one has ever worked, nor wanted to, and claim all the benefits they can.

A word of support for Galen's well informed, calm and to the point post. There are many complex reasons why people don't report neighbours, relatives or in my case, people I worked with because of concerns about their children.
SW's are bound by confidentiality. I came across some brazen benefit fraudsters but confidentiality is a real issue, and rightly so. The vast majority of benefit claimants I was involved with were genuinely in need

I suspect that some at least of the problem dates from when DLA replaced the old AA.
People we te given the benefit purely on what they claimed and no corroborating evidence was requested. Most assessments were for life or very long periods and no medical opinion was sought.
This was on the basis that the then minister Hugh Rossi stated that people would always tell the truth and should be believed.
Claims such as it could take someone 20mins to walk 20metres were accepted. I have known speedier snails!

This is a late comment. I read the PM before it was deleted and was horrified that anyone would make public something that was intended to be private. We only have the poster's word for it that the member is not current. Even if she/ he has left I feel it to be unethical and rather churlish to expose what somebody has said privately, whatever the content of the PM. Disgraceful.

"is resurrected"
By whom? No idea. The purpose? Ah well.

Obviously we read things differently, Alea.

"A dormant thread is resurrected so that somebody who had flounced off a few weeks ago could swoop in on a flying visit like the Sweeney, go for the jugular and get 2 out of her first three posts deleted !"

A dormant thread is resurrected so that....

We have seen from the programme Benefit Street, ( I couldn't bear to watch I) how certain people end up in the benefits cycle going down generations. It was in all the newspapers, with the star apparently regaining the use of her legs and going to America and becomng quite a celebrity, so of course it goes on. There has been a big change to rules regarding claiming and it will take time for those that could work but don't, to realise that working brings with it a better life than the one they have had. I feel so sorry for the children born into that life style. Those that genuinely cannot work must feel as if they are being judged by those that abuse the system and that is so wrong, they are the ones that should get all the help they need to be independent and valued.

I believe I was careful to use the passive voice in saying that the thread was resurrected without any reference to who resurrected it, but thank you for clearing that up.
I take it you had new information to add to what had been said previously, although I am not sure what there is to say that has not been said already.
Which could be why I will respectfully decline your invitation to
comment sensibly on the matter in the thread.

An Ipsos Mori survey in 2013 found the public believed 24% of benefits were fraudulently claimed...

From the linked article. Where is there mention of people thinking 47% of benefit claimants are committing fraud?

The title of the OP does of course include families and individuals who have never worked etc. who aren't claiming fraudulently, but have managed to avoid working for a living and are quite happy to carry on as they are.

By the way, Alea, I resurrected the thread, and if I hadn't Badenkate was going to. I didn't resurrect it so that someone else who had flounced off could come back on again. I seem to recall that you were going to flounce off at the same time.

Some of us care about those who are tarnished with the idea that lots of benefit claimants are fraudsters, as in the op. That's why I gave the important link to the subject.

Grannyandgrampy, there is no reason it should backfire on you. It is all done in confidence. If it's as you say it is, there are numerous people who could denounce the family, not just you.
I still say it's wrong for people to complain about those who defraud and do not do anything about it. If you are not going to do anything, it's wrong to cast aspersions. It's better just to keep quiet.
That's why people think there are 47% of benefit claimants committing fraud, because everyone claims to know somebody who does it.
I am more concerned about those benefit claimants who are defrauded, while tax cheats are told it's acceptable.

Sorry MrsJones
(Showing off again??)

??

Just been reading some of this. Gee Wizz, I didn't realise that you had to be of a certain intelligence to contribute to GN. I did pass three O Levels back in the 1960's. Does that count?

Sounds very concillatory now!

although it might be rather a long sentence for most of us

Wiv long words an subordinate clauses an all??
Difficult indeed.

You can't remember if you were actually on here when? There was no date on the PM...

Can't remember if I was actually on here then, Marelli.
I did take a few months off at one time. However, I do not mind being classified with the majority. Your grammar looks okay to me, Marelli, although it might be rather a long sentence for most of us.

Exactly, Marelli! And it was a very short list...

The difference between us is that I'm all sure we have a different view on what's important .

And don't we all have the right to voice that here?

After all it's about perception and yours may not be the same as mine Durhamjen but that doesn't make you right and me wrong. It just makes us different - and that's fine.

How about you commenting sensibly on the matter in the thread, rather than being nasty about another gran

"now children I want you to comment sensibly on the matter in the thread....."
What larks!!
I don't think anybody is being nasty about "another sweet silver haired old lady gran, as "nasty" comments get deleted don't they?
(Anybody got a plaster for Anya's jugular by the way?)

It also makes one feel that those who were not mentioned in the list of those who were considered to offer the most intelligent posts - (too many thoses - sorry if the grammar's not up to scratch) weren't up to much at all....
Just as well lots of us have thick skins!

I have absolutely no idea what you are insinuating, Anya.

Alea, it was not a dormant thread. It just had not been commented on for a few months.
I have no idea what makes a thread dormant. Six months?

How about you commenting sensibly on the matter in the thread, rather than being nasty about another gran.

Sorry, forgot myself there, I am not in charge of the thread or any other and have no right to tell anyone what they should or shouldn't say.
Just wish some of you would grow up and think about what is important.

Pm's are private and the person sending them is trusting you not to be a blabbermouth.

Makes one feel 'orrible for a while. Not nice.

Does it really break forum guidelines to copy a pm from a member who is no longer on the Forum? Why. I would never copy and paste a pm from a current member- but if the person is not named, and the member no longer active, why not?