Metiria Turei's confessed benefit fraud

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Metiria Turei's confessed benefit fraud

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ... | 18

Awrrr
18665 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1834116 31-Jul-2017 10:19

Paul1977:

Rikkitic: I don't know if it is a crime or not, and I don't really care. I think there are much bigger things to worry about.

You've said this, or a variation of, a few times. You don't think that stealing $50,000 is a big deal worth worrying about?

Regardless of "need", you can't just help yourself to other peoples money - and that is exactly what she did.

Perhaps some hours working a part time job instead of wasting time as a member of the McGillicuddy Serious Party and she wouldn't have needed to commit fraud to get by.

Some people, for whatever reason, seem a bit obsessed by this and are digging into every detail. I have not felt that compulsion so do not know exactly what has or has not been determined, or what she may or may not have said or done. I do know that there are always different interpretations of 'facts' in a developing story like this. Rather than trying to add my own version on the basis of speculations or incomplete information, I am happy to wait for everything to come out, which it will over time, and whatever conclusions or prosecutions will stem from that. Did she steal $50,000? Did she pick up a gun and go into a bank? Once the whole thing has been hashed out in public, as it certainly will be, and conclusions have been drawn, I will look at those conclusions and make my own. In the meantime, I am in no hurry to pass judgement. Let the thing run its course before you bring out the pitchforks.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1834177 31-Jul-2017 11:28

Rikkitic:

Paul1977:

Rikkitic: I don't know if it is a crime or not, and I don't really care. I think there are much bigger things to worry about.

You've said this, or a variation of, a few times. You don't think that stealing $50,000 is a big deal worth worrying about?

Regardless of "need", you can't just help yourself to other peoples money - and that is exactly what she did.

Perhaps some hours working a part time job instead of wasting time as a member of the McGillicuddy Serious Party and she wouldn't have needed to commit fraud to get by.

Some people, for whatever reason, seem a bit obsessed by this and are digging into every detail. I have not felt that compulsion so do not know exactly what has or has not been determined, or what she may or may not have said or done. I do know that there are always different interpretations of 'facts' in a developing story like this. Rather than trying to add my own version on the basis of speculations or incomplete information, I am happy to wait for everything to come out, which it will over time, and whatever conclusions or prosecutions will stem from that. Did she steal $50,000? Did she pick up a gun and go into a bank? Once the whole thing has been hashed out in public, as it certainly will be, and conclusions have been drawn, I will look at those conclusions and make my own. In the meantime, I am in no hurry to pass judgement. Let the thing run its course before you bring out the pitchforks.

No way was she struggling to bring up a child...she was earning a lot from rent and being supported by her live in partner.

I want her treated by authorities in the SAME way as anyone else caught defrauding WINZ. Simple.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18665 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1834192 31-Jul-2017 11:43

Pumpedd:

Rikkitic:

Paul1977:

Rikkitic: I don't know if it is a crime or not, and I don't really care. I think there are much bigger things to worry about.

You've said this, or a variation of, a few times. You don't think that stealing $50,000 is a big deal worth worrying about?

Regardless of "need", you can't just help yourself to other peoples money - and that is exactly what she did.

Perhaps some hours working a part time job instead of wasting time as a member of the McGillicuddy Serious Party and she wouldn't have needed to commit fraud to get by.

Some people, for whatever reason, seem a bit obsessed by this and are digging into every detail. I have not felt that compulsion so do not know exactly what has or has not been determined, or what she may or may not have said or done. I do know that there are always different interpretations of 'facts' in a developing story like this. Rather than trying to add my own version on the basis of speculations or incomplete information, I am happy to wait for everything to come out, which it will over time, and whatever conclusions or prosecutions will stem from that. Did she steal $50,000? Did she pick up a gun and go into a bank? Once the whole thing has been hashed out in public, as it certainly will be, and conclusions have been drawn, I will look at those conclusions and make my own. In the meantime, I am in no hurry to pass judgement. Let the thing run its course before you bring out the pitchforks.

No way was she struggling to bring up a child...she was earning a lot from rent and being supported by her live in partner.

I want her treated by authorities in the SAME way as anyone else caught defrauding WINZ. Simple.

No problem with that. Just a pity she isn't being treated by the howling mob the same way as anyone else ACCUSED of defrauding WINZ. She hasn't been 'caught'. She made a statement. It is being investigated.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Paul1977

5052 posts

Uber Geek

#1834220 31-Jul-2017 12:03

Rikkitic:

No problem with that. Just a pity she isn't being treated by the howling mob the same way as anyone else ACCUSED of defrauding WINZ. She hasn't been 'caught'. She made a statement. It is being investigated.

Except, of course, that she is not just accused. She has openly, unashamedly, and unapologetically admitted it.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18665 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1834231 31-Jul-2017 12:25

Paul1977:

Rikkitic:

No problem with that. Just a pity she isn't being treated by the howling mob the same way as anyone else ACCUSED of defrauding WINZ. She hasn't been 'caught'. She made a statement. It is being investigated.

Except, of course, that she is not just accused. She has openly, unashamedly, and unapologetically admitted it.

And it is being investigated and it will be appropriately dealt with in due course. When it is you can all kick the body.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1834237 31-Jul-2017 12:37

Rikkitic:

And it is being investigated and it will be appropriately dealt with in due course. When it is you can all kick the body.

Maybe you should hold off on singing her praises until she has been found not guilty then.

All the investigations will do is possibly (very unlikely) prove that she is not guilty. There is no need for anyone to rely on the investigations to prove anything. She has already admitted guilt.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1834269 31-Jul-2017 12:47

If the MSD investigation reveals there is no debt to the Crown which is quite possible we will see a mass of 'there has been a cover up conspiracy cries'

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18665 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1834272 31-Jul-2017 12:53

I am not in fact a fan of hers. What bothers me, and what I am responding to, is the eagerness with which some are rushing to put the knife in. This kind of thing is almost never a black and white matter, as some keep trying to make it out to be. I will wait until the whole story is known.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1834282 31-Jul-2017 13:04

Rikkitic:

I am not in fact a fan of hers. What bothers me, and what I am responding to, is the eagerness with which some are rushing to put the knife in. This kind of thing is almost never a black and white matter, as some keep trying to make it out to be. I will wait until the whole story is known.

Admitting to stealing taxpayer money will normally get peoples backs up. People have the right to be upset IMO, and have the right to cry for her head.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18665 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1834287 31-Jul-2017 13:07

Sure they do. And they also have the right to say let's wait and see what the context is.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Paul1977

5052 posts

Uber Geek

#1834292 31-Jul-2017 13:11

MikeB4:

If the MSD investigation reveals there is no debt to the Crown which is quite possible we will see a mass of 'there has been a cover up conspiracy cries'

It is possible that an investigation may decide that there is no debt. That, however, would not change her intent. She intentionally chose not to declare several things for the reason of obtaining more benefit than she was entitled to.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1834325 31-Jul-2017 13:55

Paul1977:

MikeB4:

If the MSD investigation reveals there is no debt to the Crown which is quite possible we will see a mass of 'there has been a cover up conspiracy cries'

It is possible that an investigation may decide that there is no debt. That, however, would not change her intent. She intentionally chose not to declare several things for the reason of obtaining more benefit than she was entitled to.

If MSD assesses there is no overpayment and as such no debt to the Crown then the only thing she did wrong was failing to declare. While technically a breach of the SSA from my experience I doubt MSD would take legal action solely for that. If they assess there is an overpayment and a debt is due the crown then there are options open to them, They could write the debt off but I doubt her current financial circumstances would meet the criteria for that. Seek to only recover the debt. Increase the debt as a means of punishment, this can be three times the assessed debt. Take a case to the Crown solicitor to look at possible prosecution.

Paul1977

5052 posts

Uber Geek

#1834372 31-Jul-2017 15:08

@MikeB4:

Paul1977:

MikeB4:

If the MSD investigation reveals there is no debt to the Crown which is quite possible we will see a mass of 'there has been a cover up conspiracy cries'

It is possible that an investigation may decide that there is no debt. That, however, would not change her intent. She intentionally chose not to declare several things for the reason of obtaining more benefit than she was entitled to.

If MSD assesses there is no overpayment and as such no debt to the Crown then the only thing she did wrong was failing to declare. While technically a breach of the SSA from my experience I doubt MSD would take legal action solely for that. If they assess there is an overpayment and a debt is due the crown then there are options open to them, They could write the debt off but I doubt her current financial circumstances would meet the criteria for that. Seek to only recover the debt. Increase the debt as a means of punishment, this can be three times the assessed debt. Take a case to the Crown solicitor to look at possible prosecution.

Agreed, but my point is it would not change the moral implications of her actions.

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1834378 31-Jul-2017 15:18

@MikeB4:

Paul1977:

MikeB4:

If the MSD investigation reveals there is no debt to the Crown which is quite possible we will see a mass of 'there has been a cover up conspiracy cries'

It is possible that an investigation may decide that there is no debt. That, however, would not change her intent. She intentionally chose not to declare several things for the reason of obtaining more benefit than she was entitled to.

If MSD assesses there is no overpayment and as such no debt to the Crown then the only thing she did wrong was failing to declare. While technically a breach of the SSA from my experience I doubt MSD would take legal action solely for that. If they assess there is an overpayment and a debt is due the crown then there are options open to them, They could write the debt off but I doubt her current financial circumstances would meet the criteria for that. Seek to only recover the debt. Increase the debt as a means of punishment, this can be three times the assessed debt. Take a case to the Crown solicitor to look at possible prosecution.

Failure to declare "other" income and that you are in co habitation with a partner is quite a serious offence, regardless of paying it back or not. The WINZ system requires you to "declare" in writing at regular intervals that you are NOT gathering extra income or sharing with a partner.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1834415 31-Jul-2017 16:18

@Pumpedd:

@MikeB4:

Paul1977:

MikeB4:

If the MSD investigation reveals there is no debt to the Crown which is quite possible we will see a mass of 'there has been a cover up conspiracy cries'

It is possible that an investigation may decide that there is no debt. That, however, would not change her intent. She intentionally chose not to declare several things for the reason of obtaining more benefit than she was entitled to.

If MSD assesses there is no overpayment and as such no debt to the Crown then the only thing she did wrong was failing to declare. While technically a breach of the SSA from my experience I doubt MSD would take legal action solely for that. If they assess there is an overpayment and a debt is due the crown then there are options open to them, They could write the debt off but I doubt her current financial circumstances would meet the criteria for that. Seek to only recover the debt. Increase the debt as a means of punishment, this can be three times the assessed debt. Take a case to the Crown solicitor to look at possible prosecution.

Failure to declare "other" income and that you are in co habitation with a partner is quite a serious offence, regardless of paying it back or not. The WINZ system requires you to "declare" in writing at regular intervals that you are NOT gathering extra income or sharing with a partner.

Correct MSD does require declaration of changes in circumstances etc. If someone says they are not in a relationship or MSD suspects someone is in relationship proving that someone meets the definition of 63(b) of the SSA is not an easy task. As for the income I posted earlier the formula used to assess the affect on benefit income may or may not have. MSD has discretion with regards to action they can take in relation to Benefit fraud or Benefit abuse.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ... | 18