**MOD NOTE UPDATED**Limerick woman complains about living in 3 bed house with 4 kids

micropig

howamidifferent wrote: »

I'm beginning to wonder if those with low post counts who are staunch in their support of this woman have a vested interest.... :cool:

You think??;)

cofy

Felexicon wrote: »

OK to once again clarify my view on this.

I agree that this woman is making rediculous demands

I am not in favor of attacking an individual when they are not there to defend thier actions

The SW shoulder the blame if this woman has excess money to go on holidays and buy nice things.

Creeping through 900 friends on a strangers facebook page is mental!!!!!!

I just don't seem to be able to get through to you, I went through the friends to try to find a link to her campaign, I repeat I had a nephew diagnosed with ADHD many years ago so I was interested in seeing this.

Amalgam

the groutch wrote: »

it really is silly season, first the 18 property landlord thinking they shouldnt have to pay their mortgage, then the woman who thinks she should get a non-contributory pension after winning €2.6m on the lotto, now this.

I don't think that was her opinion at all, to be fair. That person was quite pragmatic and understood why it might be stopped, it was a case of, 'fair enough, I understand'.

For anyone in the South Dublin area, the, 'Southside People' is trolling its readership with a similar story. Issue dated 25 April - 1 May, 2012.

Homeless Mum rejects 'unsuitable' move. 27 year old Mum, 5 kids, no Dad in sight. Not working. Priceless photo, with eyeliner and tracksuit. All looking very doleful. (pardon the pun)

Felexicon

cofy wrote: »

I just don't seem to be able to get through to you, I went through the friends to try to find a link to her campaign, I repeat I had a nephew diagnosed with ADHD many years ago so I was interested in seeing this.

Ok that's perfectly acceptable. But why would you make reference to the fact she was friends with a hairdresser, a beauty salon and even a travel agents

howamidifferent

For anyone in the South Dublin area, the, 'Southside People' is trolling its readership with a similar story. Issue dated 25 April - 1 May, 2012.

Homeless Mum rejects 'unsuitable' move. 27 year old Mum, 5 kids, no Dad in sight. Not working. Priceless photo, with eyeliner and tracksuit. All looking very doleful. (pardon the pun)

Link to add fuel to the ire

micropig

howamidifferent wrote: »

Link to add fuel to the ire

No mention of her fella either

States she got evicted from her last home, but doesn't say why


Another one with 5 kids..do you get extra benefits once you pass 3? (Probably as they need a bigger car & house)

http://www.dublinpeople.com/article.php?id=1089&l=100

Amalgam

howamidifferent wrote: »

Link to add fuel to the ire

No, not fair on the kids. I think the paper are taking the piss though, all the kids are visible with their heads cocked to one side, pouty sadness. Wind up.

Paper can be picked up from the likes of Tesco, at the entraces. (free)

Oldest is 11, youngest 2.. do the maths.

hightower1

Felexicon wrote: »

Ok that's perfectly acceptable. But why would you make reference to the fact she was friends with a hairdresser, a beauty salon and even a travel agents

I suppose because she put her life and publically funded financial situation forward of her own free will into the public domain and ones likes on facebook typically referrs to their personal interests. "Liking" travel agents , hairdressers and beauty salons there is a strong indicator of this is where she spends her money. Her money is supplied by us so that makes it relevant.

(I like video games on my facebook and true to form this is what I spend my money on, only diff being I earned my money)

cofy

Felexicon wrote: »

Ok that's perfectly acceptable. But why would you make reference to the fact she was friends with a hairdresser, a beauty salon and even a travel agents

Because ADHD is a very distressing condition for all the family, I would expect that with such an extensive array of friends, that she would have at least friended one official site. By the way I said hairdressers, salons, etc., plural.

micropig

Amalgam wrote: »

No, not fair on the kids. I think the paper are taking the piss though, all the kids are visible with their heads cocked to one side, pouty sadness. Wind up.

Paper can be picked up from the likes of Tesco, at the entraces. (free)

Oldest is 11, youngest 2.. do the maths.

Mother is 27..she has been busy popping them out since she was 16

bamboozle

Amalgam wrote: »

I don't think that was her opinion at all, to be fair. That person was quite pragmatic and understood why it might be stopped, it was a case of, 'fair enough, I understand'.

For anyone in the South Dublin area, the, 'Southside People' is trolling its readership with a similar story. Issue dated 25 April - 1 May, 2012.

Homeless Mum rejects 'unsuitable' move. 27 year old Mum, 5 kids, no Dad in sight. Not working. Priceless photo, with eyeliner and tracksuit. All looking very doleful. (pardon the pun)

ah c'mon now, that woman is currently in a homeless shelter and has rejected a move to another homeless shelter.

if anything it just highlights how Limerick woman is screwing the system to the detrament of others in need of state assistance. rather than affording limerick woman sufficient financial assistant to go to Portugal, Paris they should be making sure enough funds are available to ensure no family has to live in a homeless shelter.

Daisy M

Amalgam wrote: »

I don't think that was her opinion at all, to be fair. That person was quite pragmatic and understood why it might be stopped, it was a case of, 'fair enough, I understand'.

For anyone in the South Dublin area, the, 'Southside People' is trolling its readership with a similar story. Issue dated 25 April - 1 May, 2012.

Homeless Mum rejects 'unsuitable' move. 27 year old Mum, 5 kids, no Dad in sight. Not working. Priceless photo, with eyeliner and tracksuit. All looking very doleful. (pardon the pun)

In fairness they are homeless and apparently living in some kind of shelter. It makes me feel sick to think of 5 young children having to live in a shelter, someone is letting them down wheather its the mother or the state.

howamidifferent

This whole gravy train has to crash and the sooner the better!
Between the politicians robbing us and the lifechoice spongers, we havent a hope of supporting ourselves with our labour. Two thirds of society are on the take with their hand in the working mans pocket. Disgusting is what it is.

:mad:

Amalgam

The article is vague where it suits the publication's agenda.. The mother had accomodation, but was evicted. Why? ..it isn't made clear.

The person is not 'homeless'. They are in a shelter, that can be considered a temporary 'home'. There is a roof on that building.

Daisy M

Amalgam wrote: »

The article is vague where it suits the publication's agenda.. The mother had accomodation, but was evicted. Why? ..it isn't made clear.

The person is not 'homeless'. They are in a shelter, that can be considered a temporary 'home'. There is a roof on that building.

I see your point and it would be fair enough if there werent children involved but I dont think you can justify children living in a shelter. If its the mothers behaviour that caused the family to be evicted shame on her but also shame on the authorities for not making sure they are receiving adequete care. Children really are at the mercy of whomever is their leagal gaurdian.

token101

Daisy M wrote: »

In fairness they are homeless and apparently living in some kind of shelter. It makes me feel sick to think of 5 young children having to live in a shelter, someone is letting them down wheather its the mother or the state.

I haven't read the article, but I'd be curious as to why the move is unsuitable? If it's a bad house or in bad repair, fine. If it's something like she's not close to family or something, well that's tough sh*t.

Edit: Just saw it's another shelter apparently. Fair enough, she should reject it. Kids living in a homeless shelter long term is f***ing ridiculous in fairness.

El Weirdo

Amalgam wrote: »

The article is vague where it suits the publication's agenda.. The mother had accomodation, but was evicted. Why? ..it isn't made clear.

The person is not 'homeless'. They are in a shelter, that can be considered a temporary 'home'. There is a roof on that building.

Maybe you should check out the legal definition of homelessness.

2.—A person shall be regarded by a housing authority as being homeless for the purposes of this Act if—


(a) there is no accommodation available which, in the opinion of the authority, he, together with any other person who normally resides with him or who might reasonably be expected to reside with him, can reasonably occupy or remain in occupation of, or


(b) he is living in a hospital, county home, night shelter or other such institution, and is so living because he has no accommodation of the kind referred to in paragraph (a),


and he is, in the opinion of the authority, unable to provide accommodation from his own resources.

Thrill

token101 wrote: »

I haven't read the article, but I'd be curious as to why the move is unsuitable? .

They wanted to move her and her kids from their present homeless shelter to another homeless shelter which has been acknowledge as being unsuitable for children.

poldebruin

micropig wrote: »

No mention of her fella either

States she got evicted from her last home, but doesn't say why


Another one with 5 kids..do you get extra benefits once you pass 3? (Probably as they need a bigger car & house)

http://www.dublinpeople.com/article.php?id=1089&l=100

After reading the article, I'd have no issue with her requesting suitable accomodation. Her current situation is not tolerable. No comparison at all to the Limerick case.

However she has found herself in this situation, bad luck, bad decisions, whatever, a child should have a place they can call home (that isn't a shelter)

dj jarvis

Felexicon wrote: »

So nobody on Social Welfare should go on holiday?

as far as im aware , people on the dole are not allowed leave the state for a holiday

for the simple fact they should not be able to afford a foreign holiday while on benefits

( open to correction on this - but that was the case years ago )

she went to Disneyland - in my opinion thats taking the piss

token101

Thrill wrote: »

They wanted to move her and her kids from their present homeless shelter to another homeless shelter which has been acknowledge as being unsuitable for children.

Yeah I saw someone else say that, and that's fair enough. She's a genuine case in need of a house (though I'd be curious to what happened to the original one she was evicted from). Which makes this other case even more ridiculous.

micropig

poldebruin wrote: »

After reading the article, I'd have no issue with her requesting suitable accomodation. Her current situation is not tolerable. No comparison at all to the Limerick case.

However she has found herself in this situation, bad luck, bad decisions, whatever, a child should have a place they can call home (that isn't a shelter)

Yes she is need of accommodation but I think it's important to state why she was evicted from her first house

Anti-social behaviour? Non Payment? Did she wreck the gaff?


Evicted from her first house and in need of another...

Where is the children's father?


Is she a suitable mother?

All depends on the reason she was evicted from the first house.

FutureGuy

bamboozle, how do you know she went to Portugal? I can't see any evidence of that?

Sunnyisland

dj jarvis wrote: »

as far as i'm aware , people on the dole are not allowed leave the state for a holiday

for the simple fact they should not be able to afford a foreign holiday while on benefits

( open to correction on this - but that was the case years ago )

she went to Disneyland - in my opinion that's taking the piss

As it stands now People who are receiving there entitlements are also entitled to 12 days holidays a year,and they can go where they want.just saying

dj jarvis

realies wrote: »

As it stands now People who are receiving there entitlements are also entitled to 12 days holidays a year,and they can go where they want.just saying

ok as i said i was not sure if it had changed - it used to be the case you were NOT allowed leave the country

and really when i think about it, i cant afford one and i work , yet she can :eek:
so go figure that out !!

this **** hole just gets worse day by day

im actually finding it harder to justify going to work everyday and not seeing my kids - just go on the dole and **** it all

poldebruin

realies wrote: »

As it stands now People who are receiving there entitlements are also entitled to 12 days holidays a year,and they can go where they want.just saying

which I agree with, everyone deserves a break - escpecially the kids in these situations, I wouldn't begrudge anyone a holiday, but a family of 6 to Disneyland-Paris for a week or whatever should be setting off alarm bells.

I know a reasonably well off family with 3 kids that had to save for months (upon months) to go for the weekend!

FutureGuy

At the end of the day, it's a lifestyle choice. I'd go absolutely fcuking bonkers if I was on the dole for a long period of time. Was on it for 9 weeks and nearly went spare.

micropig

poldebruin wrote: »

I know a reasonably well off family with 3 kids that had to save for months (upon months) to go for the weekend!

Should have went down to the friendly community welfare officer

csi vegas

the groutch wrote: »

it really is silly season, first the 18 property landlord thinking they shouldnt have to pay their mortgage, then the woman who thinks she should get a non-contributory pension after winning €2.6m on the lotto, now this.

Agreed. Tis 'human rights' gone apeshíte

token101

That girl in the Dublin people; she's been on the housing list for 9 years and she's 27? So she's been on benefits her whole life (an assumption, but I'd say a fairly safe one considering the circumstances) and had four more kids whilst living without stable accomodation? Jesus, I know this judgemental, but talk about being totally irresponsible. She had one child, fair enough that's a mistake, but 5? Poor kids. What kind of life do they have in a shelter? Christ. And where's the father(s) here FFS?

micropig

token101 wrote: »

That girl in the Dublin people; she's been on the housing list for 9 years and she's 27? So she's been on benefits her whole life (an assumption, but I'd say a fairly safe one considering the circumstances) and had four more kids whilst living without stable accomodation? Jesus, I know this judgemental, but talk about being totally irresponsible. She had one child, fair enough that's a mistake, but 5? Poor kids. What kind of life do they have in a shelter? Christ. And where's the father(s) here FFS?

She had a house

Something happened and she got evicted

now she wants another

cloud493

Thats disgraceful, making your kids live in a homeless shelter :mad: I know she didn't purposely 'make them' but jesus christ. If you're gonna end up in that situation, you shouldn't have kids.

Daisy M

token101 wrote: »

That girl in the Dublin people; she's been on the housing list for 9 years and she's 27? So she's been on benefits her whole life (an assumption, but I'd say a fairly safe one considering the circumstances) and had four more kids whilst living without stable accomodation? Jesus, I know this judgemental, but talk about being totally irresponsible. She had one child, fair enough that's a mistake, but 5? Poor kids. What kind of life do they have in a shelter? Christ. And where's the father(s) here FFS?

I know its so sad, kids living in a homeless shelter is not on. I cant imagine why any woman would bring child after child into the world with no way of supporting them.

The sad fact is that decent hard working people will be continuously screwed over by the system while scroungers will bleed the system for every last scent they can get their hands on. Far too many people see the dole as a career, they pop out their first kid at 16 and ten years later, having never worked a day in their lives they have 4 or 5 more kids and a bigger disposable income than many couples who have to scrimp and save to afford to pay the bills.

micropig

Deleted User wrote: »

The sad fact is that decent hard working people will be continuously screwed over by the system while scroungers will bleed the system for every last scent they can get their hands on. Far too many people see the dole as a career, they pop out their first kid at 16 and ten years later, having never worked a day in their lives they have 4 or 5 more kids and a bigger disposable income than many couples who have to scrimp and save to afford to pay the bills.

+1

These stories also highlight how little respect people have when given free houses. If I had a free house I would look after it and spend time and money to get it like I want it.

I would make sure that I, or my children done nothing which would lead us to be evicted

bamboozle

FutureGuy wrote: »

bamboozle, how do you know she went to Portugal? I can't see any evidence of that?

its mentioned in the responses below the article in the LL that she's been to DL Paris and Portugal recently enough.

suicide_circus

Daisy M wrote: »

I know its so sad, kids living in a homeless shelter is not on. I cant imagine why any woman would bring child after child into the world with no way of supporting them.

because it might bump her up the housing list perhaps. people like her don't give a fucck if they cant support more kids, they know there will always be saps willing to work and pay tax so she can sit on her arse. lazy selfish cunnts.

Thrill

token101 wrote: »

That girl in the Dublin people; she's been on the housing list for 9 years and she's 27? So she's been on benefits her whole life (an assumption, but I'd say a fairly safe one considering the circumstances) and had four more kids whilst living without stable accomodation? Jesus, I know this judgemental, but talk about being totally irresponsible. She had one child, fair enough that's a mistake, but 5? Poor kids. What kind of life do they have in a shelter? Christ. And where's the father(s) here FFS?

Considering you know nothing about the events that led to her eviction nor anything about her life other than what is in the story, then any assumptions would be without foundation.

You have judged her as being irresponsible already. The father may not be allowed to stay in that shelter. The father may have lost his job and they may no longer have been able to afford the accommodation they were staying in and hence were evicted.

She and her partner may even have had dreams of eventually having a mortgage and owning their own homes. Another victim of the tiger.

micropig

Thrill wrote: »

She and her partner may even have had dreams of eventually having a mortgage and owning their own homes. Another victim of the tiger.

:pac::pac::pac:


Why did she get evicted? That's the only real question


& on benefits with 5 children I'm sure the state made sure she had money to pay the rent (rent allowance)

Dudess

poozers wrote: »

Us Irish people are so spoilt!

Like people with an inflated sense of entitlement? Wouldn't say it's "Us Irish" across the board like.

we're all as bad as eachother...

Um... speak for yourself there, dude(ss)...

She seems to be taking the piss all right (complex background causes aside - I mean, people are feeling sorry for her kids but those kids are likely to turn into exactly the type of adult she is; who's to say this wasn't her background?) Hard to have sympathy for her, but what's the "free house" stuff about? Local authority tenants are charged rent. And the property doesn't have to be luxurious of course but it shouldn't be in an unsafe state of repair either, especially when there are children.

I'd put money on it that some of the "Close your legs" brigade (and I agree she should cop on ta fuk about contraception - as should the father(s) of her children) fuk around and aren't always vigilant about condoms...

I'm not defending her but there are factors being omitted which form part of the bigger picture.

I'm always skeptical about the "Getting a council house by getting pregnant" notion too - having actually worked in Housing, from what I gathered, it's WAY less simplistic than that.

No guarantees the kid doesn't have ADHD either - "The kid is just a sh1t"/"It's just due to shyte parenting" always gets trotted out but can anyone prove there's no ADHD?

Kalel

Thrill wrote: »

token101 wrote: »

That girl in the Dublin people; she's been on the housing list for 9 years and she's 27? So she's been on benefits her whole life (an assumption, but I'd say a fairly safe one considering the circumstances) and had four more kids whilst living without stable accomodation? Jesus, I know this judgemental, but talk about being totally irresponsible. She had one child, fair enough that's a mistake, but 5? Poor kids. What kind of life do they have in a shelter? Christ. And where's the father(s) here FFS?

Considering you know nothing about the events that led to her eviction nor anything about her life other than what is in the story, then any assumptions would be without foundation.

You have judged her as being irresponsible already. The father may not be allowed to stay in that shelter. The father may have lost his job and they may no longer have been able to afford the accommodation they were staying in and hence were evicted.

She and her partner may even have had dreams of eventually having a mortgage and owning their own homes. Another victim of the tiger.

Jaysus everyone is a victim of the tiger..no one is any longer responsible for there actions..we may aswell all give up working and blame the tiger..I lived within my means and guess what I survived the tiger and recession..strange that..

micropig

Kalel wrote: »

Jaysus everyone is a victim of the tiger..no one is any longer responsible for there actions..we may aswell all give up working and blame the tiger..I lived within my means and guess what I survived the tiger and recession..strange that..

I want to be a victim of the tiger too, if it means I get a cheap house, loads of money and holidays to disneyland


me next please, I'll be the victim


I blame the banks


With 5 children you receive €748 from Jan 2012 in childrens allowance alone / month. Surely this covers rent and the other allowances can cover food and other necessities.

noxqs

Dreaming of a mortgage? Victim of the bubble?

The irony is - a person who was on the dole during the bubble years is probably better off financially than anyone who got a mortgage in the last 10 years if we account for technical insolvency and debt levels.

She should be thankful.

Thrill

Kalel wrote: »

Jaysus everyone is a victim of the tiger

Your right. Let assume everyone going through tough times are irresponsible welfare scroungers. It seems people are far more comfortable with assuming the worst of people.

Dudess

Dudess wrote: »

I'd put money on it that some of the "Close your legs" brigade (and I agree she should cop on ta fuk about contraception - as should the father(s) of her children) fuk around and aren't always vigilant about condoms...

Everyone's allowed one or two forgetful moments when it comes to contraception but it's funny how if you take a walk around any town in the country it's the pyjama wearing, never worked a day in their lives dole brigade who have 4 or 5 kids by the time they turn 30. The average, hard working/recently unemployed of the same age may have 1 or 2 kids by that time but most couldn't afford to have any more yet people who have never worked are popping them out left right and center.

I lived with one lad whose parents are both on the dole having never worked a day in their lives yet they each have their own council home as they are separated. The lad in question has 2 brothers and 2 sisters. Both his sisters were pregnant before they were 18 and between them now have 7 kids. They each have their own council house. His brother went straight from secondary school onto the dole where he has stayed for the past 9 years. His other brother did the same. The lad I lived with was doing a plc course but dropped out after 6 weeks, moved home and went on the dole. Now 4 years later he spends his days drinking and playing video games. There are now two generations of this family who between them have never so much as did a days work and most likely the next generation will follow int heir footsteps. The government will bend over backwards to assist them in any way yet they have contributed nothing to society.

atm I'm not working but I'm actively looking for work and have decided that if I don't find any in the coming months then I will be emigrating. The plan is that my girlfriend will follow me once she finishes college. We'd both like to have kids at some stage but not until such a time as we can afford to raise a child.

micropig

Thrill wrote: »

Your right. Let assume everyone going through tough times are irresponsible welfare scroungers. It seems people are far more comfortable with assuming the worst of people.

At 18 she went on the housing list
at 27 she is looking for a second house from the council for her 5 children


I think we can safely say, this is her chosen career

Daisy M

Thrill wrote: »

Considering you know nothing about the events that led to her eviction nor anything about her life other than what is in the story, then any assumptions would be without foundation.

You have judged her as being irresponsible already. The father may not be allowed to stay in that shelter. The father may have lost his job and they may no longer have been able to afford the accommodation they were staying in and hence were evicted.

She and her partner may even have had dreams of eventually having a mortgage and owning their own homes. Another victim of the tiger.

I have noticed a bit of a trend here in ah, when people voice an opinion on a certain situation, they are shot down by posters who dont agree and told they are assuming/presuming and been judgemental. What a load of rubbish!! It is very rare to be given full details of any event, if you read an article you form an opinion, it may not be fully correct but you do form an opinion. Some posters here would have us believe they never assume/presume anything. I find that hard to believe, you need a certain amount of assumption to get by in life. For example if you check your bank balance on payday by text its safe to presume your wages have gone in but unless you get a mini statement you dont know for defenite. If you meet someone at the airport with a suitcase its safe to assume that they are coming or going on a flight. Of course these assumptions could be wrong but the likelihood of them been true is high. People learn how to read situations, life experiences will contribute towards that learning. Anyone who says they never presume/assume anything clearly doesnt know the meaning of either word or has a very inactive brain.

Now for judging this always makes me laugh as the person who is been most judgemental is the one who bandies the word about. We are all guilty of judging and anyone who denys this is liing or truely ignorant of what it means. Most of us will judge criminals, staff who do not carry out their job properly, items in the news and not even realise we are doing it. Right now if you are reading my post and agreeing or disagreeing with me you are judging me that what I am saying is right or wrong!!

Calling people judgmental, assuming and presuming is a lazy way of debating.

alphanine

token101 wrote: »

It's got f*** all to do with any recession! She's on welfare, supposedly a stop gap, and wants to fund her life with it. That's fundamentally wrong!

She apparently is 32 and is on welfare since she was 20. 12 years on welfare???

We really are harmless eejits in this country to allow situations like this to happen.

Dudess

Deleted User wrote: »

Everyone's allowed one or two forgetful moments when it comes to contraception but it's funny how if you take a walk around any town in the country it's the pyjama wearing, never worked a day in their lives dole brigade who have 4 or 5 kids by the time they turn 30. The average, hard working/recently unemployed of the same age may have 1 or 2 kids by that time but most couldn't afford to have any more yet people who have never worked are popping them out left right and center.

I lived with one lad whose parents are both on the dole having never worked a day in their lives yet they each have their own council home as they are separated. The lad in question has 2 brothers and 2 sisters. Both his sisters were pregnant before they were 18 and between them now have 7 kids. They each have their own council house. His brother went straight from secondary school onto the dole where he has stayed for the past 9 years. His other brother did the same. The lad I lived with was doing a plc course but dropped out after 6 weeks, moved home and went on the dole. Now 4 years later he spends his days drinking and playing video games. There are now two generations of this family who between them have never so much as did a days work and most likely the next generation will follow int heir footsteps. The government will bend over backwards to assist them in any way yet they have contributed nothing to society.

Not remotely defending the above waster piss-taing but I'm just saying there are things this woman has done which lots of naysayers are guilty of but they suddenly become purer than the virgin Mary on threads like this.

Nobody's council house is their own either in fairness - unless they buy it.

Kalel

Thrill wrote: »

Kalel wrote: »

Jaysus everyone is a victim of the tiger

Your right. Let assume everyone going through tough times are irresponsible welfare scroungers. It seems people are far more comfortable with assuming the worst of people.

No let's assume that the tiger is not the root of all these peoples problems..the tiger and its now rotting carcass can't be rolled out as an excuse for people been twats..the SW system should look after those that have fallen on hard times, it should not be a lifestyle choice.. There are a lot of people on SW who have never worked a day in their lives and have no intention of ever doing so...these people should be cut off and their kids taken from them..