Basically...
...the line of work I am in allows me to claim expenses for living costs if I have to travel a fair distance to work every day. This particular system allows me to claim mortgage interest payments on second homes and utility bills - but we are also allowed claims for items of furniture, electrical goods like televisions, refurbishments and up to £400 each month for food.

So, it's a good way of making loads of cash over and above my pay (which is pretty fucking good if i'm going to be honest about it). I can just claim that the landlord of my second home charges a fortune in rent, pay him, then pocket the rest for myself. And it's all at the expense of the tax-payer! It's a great system and it allows me to pay for my 3 homes (plus my holiday home in Provence) very comfortably indeed.

Unfortunately, I recently got caught claiming about £900 a month and giving it to my partner under the pretence that I was paying rent to him, so i'm fucked.

It's a pretty high-profile job and there has been quite a lot of recent scandal because of colleagues getting caught doing the same thing, so they're coming down hard on us.

I'll be fine though - I 'outed' myself as a gay at the same time, so none of my colleagues want to condemn me for fear of being perceived as a gay-basher.

Result!
(god_is_a_ghoti Carpe Deum., Thu 3 Jun 2010, 14:44, 8 replies)

saw that coming a mile off!
shouldn't have used "expenses" and ""second homes" was a dead give away.
(Panda_z is sweating like a chav in dixons, Thu 3 Jun 2010, 15:13, closed)

Wasn't really trying to hide it...
...so much, really just describing the actions of the filthy, thieving bastards.
(god_is_a_ghoti Carpe Deum., Thu 3 Jun 2010, 15:42, closed)

yeah, plus you've just merged with one of your biggest rivals
so half the people who would be putting the boot in can't cos you're pretending to be friends at the moment, and the other half can't because they've all been caught doing the same thing.

Ah well, you can always console yourself with your millions. And cock.
( kappynitty doubled your entendre on, Thu 3 Jun 2010, 15:13, closed)

Why didn't you admit he was your partner
and claim for the entire property, then once the mortgage was paid off get another one and claim for that? Strikes me you'd be a lot better off…
( Ungersven would support SpankyHanky's patreon, Thu 3 Jun 2010, 17:42, closed)

^this
This should have been a non-story, he was claiming LESS than he would have been entitled to had he declared the relationship, he just wanted a private life (plus it started when there were a load of other lib dem scandals in the press due to the leadership contest)
( Tedium Alduce me to interlow myself., Thu 3 Jun 2010, 22:33, closed)

Oh...
...so he only put the tip in instead of pushing it all in balls-deep then?

That's good to know.

I find it completely reprehensible that these cocksuckers (ha!) can claim £40K in questionable 'living expenses' and I can't even get £40 a week when I need help because my partner works more than 25 hours per week.

But as long as you think that it's a "non-story", that's ok.
(god_is_a_ghoti Carpe Deum., Fri 4 Jun 2010, 15:22, closed)

Let's take an analogy
Say there's a big news story about a footballer being hired on a £300,000 a year contract - that's a LOT of money that he doesn't deserve, but it's _comparatively_ little in his business.

I agree David Laws shouldn't have made the claims he did, but I disagree that those claims are somehow worse than any of the MPs claiming 2nd homes within the rules currently.
( Ungersven would support SpankyHanky's patreon, Sat 5 Jun 2010, 11:44, closed)

That's a facile analogy...
...because the footballer's £300K wouldn't come from the taxpayer...

And I don't think that David Laws is any worse than any of the rest - they're all thieving bastards in my eyes - but Laws was the current scandal and I thought that it might be more relevant to parody him for the QOTW rather than someone else.

Nowhere did I imply that he was any more unethical than the rest.

Just because claiming vast amounts of money at the expense of the taxpayer is allowed under the current rules, that does not make it any less heinous.
(god_is_a_ghoti Carpe Deum., Wed 9 Jun 2010, 9:25, closed)