BBC Rogue Traders' Dan Penteado admits benefit fraud.

[Aadam]

Has anyone else seen this delightful article, on the BBC of all places?

BBC News - BBC Rogue Traders Dan Penteado admits benefit fraud

Apparently Dan had been working on the Rogue Traders show, whilst claiming housing and council tax benefits... This story will no doubt give Dave more ammunition for his personal crusade against the poor. Because we all know benefit fraud costs more money than, oh I don't know, tax avoidance...

 

[Surrey_Albion]

Gutted, him and that other bloke are really funny, shame because that will be the end of that duo

 

[Gangsta]

A mate of mine back in the 1990's was working at Brighton council and claimed that there were a number of people claiming benefits whilst working in the benefits department. Nothing would surprise me.

 

[Aadam]

A mate of mine back in the 1990's was working at Brighton council and claimed that there were a number of people claiming benefits whilst working in the benefits department. Nothing would surprise me.

That's quite shocking. I'm assuming no one ratted them out? Unfortunately those few that do cheat the system, ruin it for those that actually need it.

 

[Mr Smggles]

Couldn't make it up.

 

[Gangsta]

That's quite shocking. I'm assuming no one ratted them out? Unfortunately those few that do cheat the system, ruin it for those that actually need it.

I dunno what happened but I used to go out with a senior HR manager at the council and it was so difficult to actually get rid of anyone I always got the feeling that in some departments people thought they could get away with murder. My ex spent over 6 months trying to (legally) get rid of someone who had taken a ring off a dead body. I am not making this up!

 

[cunning fergus]

Has anyone else seen this delightful article, on the BBC of all places?

BBC News - BBC Rogue Traders Dan Penteado admits benefit fraud

Apparently Dan had been working on the Rogue Traders show, whilst claiming housing and council tax benefits... This story will no doubt give Dave more ammunition for his personal crusade against the poor. Because we all know benefit fraud costs more money than, oh I don't know, tax avoidance...

Eh?

Do you mean that the UK loses out on less money via benefit fraud than it does with legal tax avoidance schemes?

Could you share the cost/benefit algarithm with us on this one?

By the way there is nothing delightful about our Portuguese friend here mugging off the UK's taxpayer whilst he was also geting a decent earn off the UK TV licence fee payer.

The fact that he was on a consumer protection programme like Watchdog just makes it even more galling. Given that he has knowingly committed this fraud he was either (1) supremely arrogant, (2) mentally retarded or (3) a combination of (1) and (2)

Maybe you both have something in common?

 

[Doc Lynam]

He who lives by the sword!

 

[Aadam]

Eh?

Do you mean that the UK loses out on less money via benefit fraud than it does with legal tax avoidance schemes?

Could you share the cost/benefit algarithm with us on this one?

By the way there is nothing delightful about our Portuguese friend here mugging off the UK's taxpayer whilst he was also geting a decent earn off the UK TV licence fee payer.

The fact that he was on a consumer protection programme like Watchdog just makes it even more galling. Given that he has knowingly committed this fraud he was either (1) supremely arrogant, (2) mentally retarded or (3) a combination of (1) and (2)

Maybe you both have something in common?

Sarcasm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Of course I don't think the UK loses out on more money because of benefit fraud than legal tax avoidance. Assuming that is what you're getting at? Your double negative threw me.

And no, I don't think the article is delightful, I was being facetious.

 

[perseus]

The BBC don't exactly pay a lot and for that small amount he can hardly have been living it up: just scraping through. At first with a half decent accountant, he would probably qualify for the benefit. More like a case of an unpaid bill than deliberate deception. Idiot. Not that I have ever watched the programme.

 

[Aadam]

The BBC don't exactly pay a lot and for that small amount he can hardly have been living it up: just scraping through. At first with a half decent accountant, he would probably qualify for the benefit. More like a case of an unpaid bill than deliberate deception. Idiot. Not that I have ever watched the programme.

Did you read the article?

The prosecution said the offences went back to 2007 when Penteado filled out his first claim form and failed to declare he had another bank account.

The court heard he repeated the fraud in subsequent years up to 2011.

In that time Penteado failed to tell Bournemouth Borough Council he had been paid more than £56,000 for his work on Rogue Traders from 2008 to 2011.

Kerry O'Neill, prosecuting, said: "He received £24,077.60 in housing and council tax benefit he was not entitled to.

"He failed to notify the borough council of the money coming in."

 

[perseus]

Did you read the article?

That's £8000 a year for housing. Not exactly a mansion. Just did not get around to telling them when the cheque came in. Presumably he stashed it in his business account and the benefit was paid into his current account. A thing to watch though. It is easily done.

 

[ROKERITE]

Has anyone else seen this delightful article, on the BBC of all places?

BBC News - BBC Rogue Traders Dan Penteado admits benefit fraud

Apparently Dan had been working on the Rogue Traders show, whilst claiming housing and council tax benefits... This story will no doubt give Dave more ammunition for his personal crusade against the poor. Because we all know benefit fraud costs more money than, oh I don't know, tax avoidance...

But there is a world of difference between criminal benefit fraud and legal tax avoidance.
I, and I'd think most people, get more annoyed by someone lying and making a false claim to take money from the state, than I do someone paying an accountant to find loopholes through which to pay less tax on their own money. It would be good to have a government (we never have yet) that dramatically simplified the tax system and closed those loopholes so that those earning millions were unable to pay a lower percentage of their income than those earning thirty or forty grand a year, but that's another subject.

 

[Kumquat]

That's £8000 a year for housing. Not exactly a mansion. Just did not get around to telling them when the cheque came in. Presumably he stashed it in his business account and the benefit was paid into his current account. A thing to watch though. It is easily done.

Didn't get around to telling them? In four years?

 

[Aadam]

That's £8000 a year for housing. Not exactly a mansion. Just did not get around to telling them when the cheque came in. Presumably he stashed it in his business account and the benefit was paid into his current account. A thing to watch though. It is easily done.

For four years he had not got round to telling them about this account. Each time he claimed this benefit.

 

[severnside gull]

Eh?

Do you mean that the UK loses out on less money via benefit fraud than it does with legal tax avoidance schemes?

Could you share the cost/benefit algarithm with us on this one?

By the way there is nothing delightful about our Portuguese friend here mugging off the UK's taxpayer whilst he was also geting a decent earn off the UK TV licence fee payer.

The fact that he was on a consumer protection programme like Watchdog just makes it even more galling. Given that he has knowingly committed this fraud he was either (1) supremely arrogant, (2) mentally retarded or (3) a combination of (1) and (2)

Maybe you both have something in common?

Wonder who grassed him?

Won't go down well on here

 

[Aadam]

But there is a world of difference between criminal benefit fraud and legal tax avoidance.
I, and I'd think most people, get more annoyed by someone lying and making a false claim to take money from the state, than I do someone paying an accountant to find loopholes through which to pay less tax on their own money. It would be good to have a government (we never have yet) that dramatically simplified the tax system and closed those loopholes so that those earning millions were unable to pay a lower percentage of their income than those earning thirty or forty grand a year, but that's another subject.

Ah, I edited my original post and appear to have cut off the legal part before tax avoidance. Whilst benefit fraud does irk me, it is less damaging to the British economy than tax avoidance, ala Vodafone.

 

[perseus]

Casual Work

Steal millions and they make you King, steal a pittance and they put you in the Jailhouse.

There is a difference between deliberately falsifying a claim, than just omitting to tell the authorities about some black earnings. The difference is if you get caught or not, usually.

If you have a contract for fixed work it is different.

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

Shiver me frickin timbers!

Not condoning what he did or making any link to it, but circa £56k in earnings for 2-3 years work doesn't seem much for a BBC Co-presenter on a prime time show!

 

[Kumquat]

Steal millions and they make you King, steal a pittance and they put you in the Jailhouse.

There is a difference between deliberately falsifying a claim, than just omitting to tell the authorities about some black earnings. The difference is if you get caught or not, usually.

If you have a contract for fixed work it is different.

It's a legal entitlement to let the local authority know within 21 days. If he hadn't told them for a few months then fine. But 4 years? This case is classified as a dishonest or false representation for obtaining benefit. If they've charged him then it means they can prove he deliberately and knowingly fraudulently obtained this money. In the big scheme of things clearly there are other priorities like tax evasion where the money is significantly more but benefit fraud costs the country £21bn a year. They have a choice what they do with him. They can ask for a jail sentence of up to 6 months, (3 months if it's false representation) but more likely they'll just fine him. They can recover the costs quite easily.