Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
The Masked Tulip

£95,000-A-Year Benefits Family Of 12 Re-Homed In A £1,000-A-Week House...

Recommended Posts

now, if there was a case for kids into care, this would apparently be it.

animal poo and human poo all over the place.

I mean, WTF is the CARER they receive allowance for doing with their time...CARERS should be wiping the arses and licking the boots of these poor unfortunate people.

course, its the Daily Hate, so there is more to the story than the headline.

And why does a 5 bed place cost £1000 per week?

ANd why are they having FOOD delivered at the taxpayers further expense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

£95,000-a-year benefits family of 12 re-homed in a £1,000-a-week house... 'after they trashed the last one'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1309201/95-000-year-benefits-family-12-homed-1-000-week-house--trashed-one.html#ixzz0yf8Tgonm

Good God what a depressingly awful situation parents producing more and more children that they are very obviously incapable of looking after.

They are on the fiddle though;

"The couple have systematically trashed up to nine houses since Pete quit the army in 2001 to care for Sam after she was registered disabled with a bad back."

Sam was registered disabled with a bad back, how on earth then was she still capable of carrying and giving birth to so many children? I think maybe they should slip some covert contraceptives into their delivered breakfasts so that they dont bring any more children into the world to live in their own filth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ANd why are they having FOOD delivered at the taxpayers further expense?

I just thoroughly read the article and saw this. She has breakfast delivered and moans because she has to prepare it herself. And she even has the audacity to say:

"'The benefits aren't much. By the time we have to pay for food and clothes and electricity we don't have much left."

If you ask me the kids should be taken into care and the parents should be kicked out onto the streets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

£95,000-a-year benefits family of 12 re-homed in a £1,000-a-week house... 'after they trashed the last one'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1309201/95-000-year-benefits-family-12-homed-1-000-week-house--trashed-one.html#ixzz0yf8Tgonm

95k a year, fck me theyve gone about this the wrong way, they should have collapsed a 300 yr old bank and they could have picked that up every 3 months giving them enough money for a cleaner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/942063/The-unemployed-family-who-WORK-the-system-and-live-rent-free.html

Must be doing rounds in the NoTW as well.

Just think of the sort of job they need to get to be able to afford accommodation. There is no way they can ever afford to work because of the benefits system.

Social services visited their Bath home in December 2009 and January and March this year after receiving reports they were living in filth and squalor.

When officers investigated, they were stunned to be confronted by filthy mattresses and human and animal excrement covering the floor and walls.

But amazingly, the landlord of the property, who admitted he had not visited the house in years, was ordered to clean up the house.

From the Wail article

What I find even more amazing is that Social Service felt it fit to leave children with parents who would allow themselves to live in this state. Too much trouble to wash the walls was it?

But Sam's not satisfied. "It's not really that much money we get," she complained. "It's certainly not enough for all of us. By the time we pay for food, clothes, electricity and £100 a week for the cattery, we don't have much left. It's tough."

From the NoTW article, £100 a week for the cattery, ever thought you can't really afford the cats?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Former landlord Abdullah Khateeb, 60, from Bath, said: 'When they moved in they had five children. By the time they left four years later it had doubled to ten

Baby factory anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/942063/The-unemployed-family-who-WORK-the-system-and-live-rent-free.html

Must be doing rounds in the NoTW as well.

Just think of the sort of job they need to get to be able to afford accommodation. There is no way they can ever afford to work because of the benefits system.

From the Wail article

What I find even more amazing is that Social Service felt it fit to leave children with parents who would allow themselves to live in this state. Too much trouble to wash the walls was it?

From the NoTW article, £100 a week for the cattery, ever thought you can't really afford the cats?

im still trying to work out how you get sh!t up the walls, its a neat trick and no mistake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is?

well, the fact that maybe he is a councillor, or gay, or a Mormon.

Damn...you dont expect me to actually read a DM story and beleive it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, the fact that maybe he is a councillor, or gay, or a Mormon.

Damn...you dont expect me to actually read a DM story and beleive it?

Just that there's so many cliches on this site. "Daily Hate" is one of the more knee jerk ones. Newspapers are comics in this country, yes, but even so a lot of stuff in them is pretty factual and this particular story has the ring of truth about it. Stories like this NEED outing. People in this country NEED to start getting cross about where their money is being pished away. You'd be pretty hacked off if they neglected to expose this sort of abuse of taxpayers' money. Credit where it's due.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just that there's so many cliches on this site. "Daily Hate" is one of the more knee jerk ones. Newspapers are comics in this country, yes, but even so a lot of stuff in them is pretty factual and this particular story has the ring of truth about it. Stories like this NEED outing. People in this country NEED to start getting cross about where their money is being pished away. You'd be pretty hacked off if they neglected to expose this sort of abuse of taxpayers' money. Credit where it's due.

Oh sure, but its probably not as bad as they make out....12 kids need feeding or would you prefer they were on the street.....they are our future, faeces on the bed or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.newsofthe...-rent-free.html

Must be doing rounds in the NoTW as well.

Just think of the sort of job they need to get to be able to afford accommodation. There is no way they can ever afford to work because of the benefits system.

From the Wail article

What I find even more amazing is that Social Service felt it fit to leave children with parents who would allow themselves to live in this state. Too much trouble to wash the walls was it?

From the NoTW article, £100 a week for the cattery, ever thought you can't really afford the cats?

a toilet in every room too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Classy bird she comes with a 4 bedroom house and 45k a year after tax, and brings you breakfast in bed everyday.

and apparently has a nice party piece standing on her head and sh*tting up the wall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.....all part of Gordon Brown's wonderland for Britain ....the society that's paid not to look after itself ....Nuliebour Socialism .....all living in the Tony, Gordo and Mandy dream .... what nightmare will turn up next....?..... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On top of that, their £960 a week rent is also paid, which is so high because their breakfast is delivered every day.

:(

Edited by Sir John Steed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh sure, but its probably not as bad as they make out....12 kids need feeding or would you prefer they were on the street.....they are our future, faeces on the bed or not.

Vacuous response, irrelevant to the point I was making.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dysfunctional family supported by the taxpayer, housed in mansions because it's their "right", and expected to be waited on hand and foot, but that's enough about the House of Windsor, what are we going to do with these scrougers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Up MPs salaries......How can an MP live on less than a bunch of spongers.......and so expensive in London....they need double the lowlives payout plus expenses. Get to work you lazy wastes of space, you've parasites to subsedize.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 kids need feeding or would you prefer they were on the street.....they are our future, faeces on the bed or not.

I assume you're joking? The future of these kids is to live on welfare all their lives and pump out dozens of new welfare cases at the expense of those few remaining people who do some productive work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh sure, but its probably not as bad as they make out....12 kids need feeding or would you prefer they were on the street.....they are our future, faeces on the bed or not.

Bloo this is exactly the problem. It's the creation of 'moral obligation' by those with massive families and no means to support them that's the issue. We all hate seeing people scabbing off the welfare because they 'expect' or 'deserve' it just because their loins work and they have no concept of contraception.

As a state you essentially have few options to controlling this as i see it:

1) Limiting Childbirth per family - in China you had the one child policy, not suggesting anything so drastic but surely 10+ kids living off income support isn't sustainable

2) Enforced Contraception - there are plenty of ways which can be used to reduce fertility

3) Cut Benifits - which of course runs the risks of increasing child poverty (the obvious problem here is it's not so much low income that creates a poor environment for kids as the poor parenting)

4) Increase Education and work availability - i.e. make them do more with their lives

The first two of these are not palatable to the genaral public nor will it win much in the way of votes but option 3 is probably the only current viable option and 4 is a tough sell when you now have multigenerational families who have never worked.

Edited by pyewackitt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 246 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.