I Will Deal With It

And she's a director of the Universities Superannuation Scheme Pension fund.
Posh biscuits and pension panics together at last.

Smileless2012 there seems to be some discrepancy in your posts. First you say your father could have afforded to pay more but didn't, so your brother got a grant, then you claim your father wasn't hiding assets. But student grants were assessed on income and if your father could have paid more, morally he should have done so. A definition of Fraud as you seem to think it wasn't-
"wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain."
It was certainly wrongful deception and it resulted in financial gain.

New Statesman labour supporting press?

"Cowley has consciously commissioned new writers wanting the magazine "to be read by people who weren’t on the left as well as people interested in progressive politics and the Labour Party". Under Cowley, the magazine was hostile to Labour leaders Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn.[15] A few months before the 2017 election, Cowley wrote of the Labour opposition, describing Corbyn's party as "fatally divided" and commented that Conservative MPs "feel no pressure from" Labour and "that there is no opposition".[16]

Two days before the 2017 general election, Cowley forecast that the Labour Party would suffer "a shattering defeat under Jeremy Corbyn".[17] However shortly after polling stations closed, the exit poll predicted a hung parliament. At an NS party, Cowley was reported as having said: "Have we been too hard on Corbynism?" "

Very supportive.

Trisher I think you are confusing a moral obligation of an absent father with their legal obligations many years ago.
It could be defamatory to write fraud accusations without knowing the detail of the situation, which is unlikely to be shared on a public forum.
I think it's time to move on now ......

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_left-wing_publications_in_the_United_Kingdom

OK Jen. Just let me know which ones are the right shade of red.

I was a divorced mum when DS2 went to University. As the custodial parent, his grant was assessed on my income, rather than his father's. Jointly we could well have afforded to support him and his income was sufficient for DS2 to get a much reduced grant. No fraud was involved as only the custodial parent was obliged to declare income. Having said that, my ex did make informal contributions to DS's 'drinking and clubbing funds'.

anonnodominiyour post sums up exactly the situation that my mother was in. My mother's income on which my brother's grant was assessed was rather small, hence the grant being granted.

My father has many faults trisher but "wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in personal or financial gain wasn't one of them".

The only thing he gained personally and financially by refusing to provide financial support to my brother was more money for himself. When he later found out that my brother had qualified as a solicitor he probably bragged about it and omitted to say it was in spite of him.

As in annodomini's case "no fraud was involved as only the custodial parent was obliged to declare income". So my claim, as you put it that my father wasn't hiding assets is irrelevant.

You took such offence at the example I gave of someone I believed to be committing benefit fraud, some one whose name I didn't know and yet here you are, accusing my father, some one whose name you don't know of committing fraud.

I agree with Primrose it's time to move on but if you really want to continue to bait me trisher you're going to have to do better than that.

Hear hear Smileless
Time to let all the pointless outrage from posters( about one comment) go.
Nobody should accuse a posters family of anything either, way too personal.

Of course it was wrong of me to accuse your parents of fraud Smileless2012! So perhaps you now know at least something of how the man, whose name you don't know, and have no evidence on which to base your claims of fraud, feels.
It isn't pleasant is it to be accused of something is it?

The man in question knows nothing about it!
Yet here you are accusing a poster ( Father ) trisher disgraceful.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

I have no desire to continue this futile argument trisher so this is the last time I will respond to a post from you regarding the issue of fraud.

You have IMO undermined your own argument by doing the very thing that you criticised me for doing. You are behaving like a playground bully but will not succeed in bullying or intimidating me off of this, or any other thread.

I tried to explain and reason with you and you refused to listen, so I resorted to needling you by making it personal and you take violent offence. You started the posting about a man you accused of benefit fraud. Admit that this was a wrongful assumption and I will drop it. Instead you pretend to be bullied. Its a fucking discussion and you can leave it at any time.
rar you don't know who is reading these posts and who might be affected by accusations of benefit fraud and afraid to claim benefits because they fear what others will say. At least I am open and honest and not gossiping behind someone's back. And I have said I knew it was wrong. It was a tactic to show how it feels to be accused of fraud.

The man in question knows nothing about it!

But it does give everyone on here bit more understanding of the prejudice others, especially the members they share this forum with. If they actually have to claim benefits they get a bit more sense to of the mind-set some have of them. This will be personal to at least some on here.

://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/jul/29/leasehold-tycoon-man-whose-firms-control-40000-uk-homes?CMP=fb_gu

Here is another story of leeching money.

oops! posted before I finished my comment.

How will Teresa May and her cabinet react to growing anger at this, easily sorted, level of parasitic money making?

Tried to open the link Penstemmon but just got a blank screen. Could be me, I'm not very good with technology but perhaps you could check the link is OK.

Primrose65

Sat 29-Jul-17 20:53:35

I think it's time to move on now ......

Sun 30-Jul-17 10:20:52

It's time you stfu trisher You've acted like a playground bully.

What is intriguing me is why, from what I can make out, a very new poster feels emboldened to act as the forum police? These are just two examples. In real life most people in a new group spend some time establishing themselves and working out the group dynamics before trying to take charge.

Or is Primrose someone who's changed their name?

Try this one, Smileless
I think there was a bit missing from Penstemmon's link

www.theguardian.com/money/2017/jul/29/leasehold-tycoon-man-whose-firms-control-40000-uk-homes?CMP=fb_gu

Who knows?!!!! But it certainly isn't me!!

No, I didn't think it was you, nn Anyway, you're still here and unchanged..

Is it possible to have two profiles on Gnet?

The same thoughts occurred to me Maizie.

No Maizie, I haven't changed my name. Sorry you're not able to deal with a confident person and have to create a fake backstory so I can fit into your assumptions. I'm not the forum police, but I don't like bullies.

Again who knows, but it must be possible to find out from GNHQ?

About claiming disability benefit (PIP) I have a close friend who has had Parkinson's for years. She can't work now, is a WASPI women so can't get her pension for several more years. She is reluctant to claim PIP as she feels neighbours see her at good times, when she has just taken medication and is at her best, feeling strong enough to go out. She goes to the gym to strengthen muscles and goes swimming too. It doesn't mean she is fit and well. Neighbours don't see her when she is at her worst barely able to stand. Because of this she feels she can't claim the benefits to which she is entitled.
We really don't know what people suffer when they are at home unable to go out.
We can't assume everyone is capable of working.