David Chaytor Wishes He Was This Lucky..

[exiges]

Taken from Private Eye mag

Former Labour MP David Chaytor banged up for fiddling £18,350 expenses, might look ruefully at the case of another Labour politician on a similar charge and wonder at the difference in outcmes.

Mr Justice Saunders told Chaytor his sentence had been "increased significantly to reflect the breach of trust involved" because he had been an MP

Last month, however, Coventry city councillor Raja Mohammed Asif was fined just £750 with £1300 costs after being convicted of breaching the public's trust by fraudulently claiming both council tax benefit and housing benefit to the tune of £14,000

The council's lawyers - who were supposed to be prosecuting Asif - tried to persuade Leamington magistrates to agree an arrangement whereby Asif would plead guilty to lesser charges on the understanding that he paid the council's costs.

Although this proposal was given short shrift by magistrates, other benefit fraudsters might reasonably ask why they, too, are not offered such cosy deals. The ruling Labour group has denied leaning on the lawyers to go softly on their crooked comrade.

Asif deliberately hid the fact that he had more than £20,000 of savings, making him ineligible to claim either benefit, and claimed he didn't actually know who his landlord was.. Not very impressive, given that his "landlord" was, er, his own son"

Edited January 24, 2011 by exiges

[Nationalist]

Taken from Private Eye mag

Looks like deal stitched up at the local mosque.

[Executive Sadman]

Stupid though, isnt it? If he had just £5k of savings, and a £1million home owned outright, he'd be entitled to Council tax benefit.

If he had a £1million house and a £100,000 mortgage, he'd get SMI without his savings, and wouldnt be expected to sell.

This is why i dont like the 'if youre not breaking the laws, then youve nothing to fear' Liebour-totalitarian crap. Most laws are obscene.

[leicestersq]

It is not clear if this crook was ordered to repay the money he had defrauded.

With benefits, we need a citizens income or negative income tax to replace all other benefits ASAP.

And for fraudsters, we need a one strike and your out rule. Get caught cheating once, and no more benefits of any sort. And that means no matter how great the hardship they face, it was their decision to defraud.

[erranta]

It is not clear if this crook was ordered to repay the money he had defrauded.

With benefits, we need a citizens income or negative income tax to replace all other benefits ASAP.

And for fraudsters, we need a one strike and your out rule. Get caught cheating once, and no more benefits of any sort. And that means no matter how great the hardship they face, it was their decision to defraud.

It appears he was a paid, working councillor who was also claiming/scamming benefits.

Not an 'unemployed' person thieving benefits!

Another vitriolic, extremist viewpoint from you - cleverly turned into an attack on mostly unlucky, thrown out of work, benefit claimants!

Should that apply to all Politicians/Lords/Prime Minister caught cheating on their expenses? Vile Oddy!

"David Cameron repays nearly £1000 he had claimed on expenses after what he calls a "thorough review" of his claims"

Instead of being prosecuted automatically in courts - Cheating Govt officials can review their cheating and decide to repay some of it back (without recourse or criminal offence to stain their 'CHARACTER' )

Edited January 24, 2011 by erranta

[leicestersq]

It appears he was a paid, working councillor who was also claiming/scamming benefits.

Not an 'unemployed' person thieving benefits!

Another vitriolic, extremist viewpoint from you - cleverly turned into an attack on mostly unlucky, thrown out of work, benefit claimants!

Should that apply to all Politicians/Lords/Prime Minister caught cheating on their expenses? Vile Oddy!

"David Cameron repays nearly £1000 he had claimed on expenses after what he calls a "thorough review" of his claims"

Instead of being prosecuted automatically in courts - Cheating Govt officials can review their cheating and decide to repay some of it back (without recourse or criminal offence to stain their 'CHARACTER' )

I never said he wasnt working.

Nor have I ever called for any leniency for anyone defrauding the taxpayer in Parliament. Same with control frauds at banks.

All frauds are wrong, and should be severely punished. That includes benefit frauds. It is odd in this story that the judge has come up with the most severe retribution, and that doesnt include prison, or a ban from public office which I thought would have been the least should have been imposed.

FWIW, any fraud by those with assets, should not only be met by a prison sentence, but seizure of assets ten times the amount of the fraud for which they were convicted. I would like to see that.

And yes, it seems that there are those in high office who were also caught by the Telegraph revelations. I still dont understand why claiming for a Duck Island was not fraud, it certainly couldnt have been construed as needed to support Parliamentary activities.

As for extremist, I dont see what is wrong with calling for fraud to be punished properly. If we dont, everyone will do it. It seems that so many are already that the situation is getting out of hand.