Quote
If there was a 1040 or a 1099 generated then it would turn up in the Social Security database. Out local DSS workers can access that earnings record and do when it is time to check (usually annually). I believe lottery winnings generate a 1099, so she would have been caught at her next review anyway.
That 1099 doesn't say she won $1M in September, just that she got it sometime during 2011. And those are typically generated in late January. In the case of the lotto, they could look up public records, but many other sources (inheritance) would not be so easily checked. They would need to contact her and ask her to elaborate on the date.
There's only so many obvious cases like this one. The smaller violations would be much harder to determine.
kallend 1,679
QuoteQuote“DHS relies on clients being forthcoming about their actual financial status,” DHS Director Maura Corrigan said in a statement
Wow.
Yep. And people wonder why benefits are so very abused. Because the system is set up to be abused easily and readily.
Don't hate the player. Hate the game.
![[:/]](/uploads/emoticons/dry.png "[:/]"){kind=small}
Well, the govt. could hire more staff to do the checking, but then the same folks that scream and whinge about cheats would be screaming and whinging about govt. spending.
How much do you think the net GAIN was when the IRS budget for auditors was cut to "save" money?
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
wolfriverjoe 1,371
She's now facing felony charges.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/michigan_lottery_winner_fraud_used_QNfPVuIeXqXcQv8cEPVlCK?utm_medium=rss&utm_content=National
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/michigan_lottery_winner_fraud_used_QNfPVuIeXqXcQv8cEPVlCK?utm_medium=rss&utm_content=National
"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy
"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo
"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo
wmw999 2,175
There are, but not everyone is caught.Quotearen't there people 'in place' who are supposed to keep an eye on things, already
When you consider that the cost of what she stole in food stamp benefits appears to be less than $2000, well, while a lot of those add up, individually it's not huge. If it cost $50,000 (requirements, developer & tester salaries, computer time, and working out any bugs) to set up an interface between the lottery system and DHS, would it be worth it? They'd have to catch a bunch of food-stamp-receiving significant lotto winners to make it worthwhile.
A nosy food stamp worker might have checked to see if she was receiving benefits. Of course, that might be some kind of privacy violation.
All the news coverage is probably the best result of all; maybe it'll scare someone else.
Wendy P.
There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)
From what you first stated, it's cheaper to let 'em slide! 
Chuck
QuoteFrom what you first stated, it's cheaper to let 'em slide!
no one slid here. She did it, it was noticed, and she now has criminal charges filed. Seems to have worked out just well. It's reactive instead of proactive, but reactive is good enough and much cheaper.
QuoteFrom what you first stated, it's cheaper to let 'em slide!
Chuck
Sometimes it is, and this is an area that government should and has to mirror business. An easy example is retail. One of the biggest costs to any retailer is shrinkage, which includes shoplifting, theft form employees and other merchandise that is spoiled or goes missing. No retailer can afford to ignore shrinkage as it cuts directly and substantially into profit margins. It theory every retailer would love to have shrinkage of 0%. However at some point the cost of enforcement outweighs the cost of the shrinkage and the store decides it is cheaper to let some merchandise get out of the store. Of course they are constantly trying to come up with lower-cost more efficient ways to reduce shrinkage as well as tracking any new schemes that aim to take advantage of holes in the system.
"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"
QuoteQuoteFrom what you first stated, it's cheaper to let 'em slide!
no one slid here. She did it, it was noticed, and she now has criminal charges filed. Seems to have worked out just well. It's reactive instead of proactive, but reactive is good enough and much cheaper.
I know. The way the 'process' to catch someone like her was outlined for me, it sounds cheaper to let it go. The attention on a food stamp recipient who wins a lottery would basically take care of the situation. Which would work, thus, saving tax-payer money.
Chuck
QuoteQuoteFrom what you first stated, it's cheaper to let 'em slide!
Chuck
Sometimes it is, and this is an area that government should and has to mirror business. An easy example is retail. One of the biggest costs to any retailer is shrinkage, which includes shoplifting, theft form employees and other merchandise that is spoiled or goes missing. No retailer can afford to ignore shrinkage as it cuts directly and substantially into profit margins. It theory every retailer would love to have shrinkage of 0%. However at some point the cost of enforcement outweighs the cost of the shrinkage and the store decides it is cheaper to let some merchandise get out of the store. Of course they are constantly trying to come up with lower-cost more efficient ways to reduce shrinkage as well as tracking any new schemes that aim to take advantage of holes in the system.
I see, what you're saying.
Chuck
GeorgiaDon 340
And here I thought shrinkage was what you got from swimming in cold water. I'm always learning new things here in SC.QuoteOne of the biggest costs to any retailer is shrinkage...
Don
_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)
Coreece 190
QuoteShe's now facing felony charges.
I dunno...I don't wanna condone fraud, but doesn't anyone else think this is a tad excessive? a felony?
Sometimes I think stupidity and ignorant justification/ wishful thinking should be cause for lenience...I dunno, maybe I tend to give women more leeway than they deserve...
Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...
QuoteQuoteShe's now facing felony charges.
I dunno...I don't wanna condone fraud, but doesn't anyone else think this is a tad excessive? a felony?
Sometimes I think stupidity and ignorant justification/ wishful thinking should be cause for lenience...I dunno, maybe I tend to give women more leeway than they deserve...
Seems to me that over the years, there've been a lot of complaints about welfare fraud and how it is costing us tax-payers too much. Could be that this woman is being made an example of and that this is the beginning of a 'crack-down'. I think, it's a good start. It's about time!
My wife, who is a retired peace officer says; "Women are the worst!"
Chuck
wmw999 2,175
Nope, and I'm usually about the most sympathetic person in the world. According to at least one news story, she also had an unreported job during some of the time she was on food stamps.Quotedunno...I don't wanna condone fraud, but doesn't anyone else think this is a tad excessive? a felony?
A job isn't illegal, but you're supposed to report it -- it affects the benefit.
By throwing hte book at a really egregious offense, with lots and lots of publicity, DHS gets lots of "make an example" mileage. There is enough information in food stamp literature and talking-to that yes, you know you should report it. Really (I volunteer helping people to fill out applications).
Wendy P.
There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)
Isn't ignorance of the law, no excuse?
Chuck
All depends on the law, and I am sure Andy or Lawrocket will correct me if I am wrong, but certain crimes including perjury and fraud, one of the elements of the crime you have to prove is intent. In some case ignorance is an excuse.