Michigan lottery winner collected food stamps after winning...

[agalisgv]

She didn't self-report an increase in assets so I think there might be a case for recovering the money. It's only a drip (less than a drop) in the bucket but the principle is worth upholding (IMO).

According to the reporter who did the piece, the woman didn't do anything illegal. Just unethical.

I assume the reporter who's based in MI would have pointed out any illegalities if they existed.

I should mention this happened in another state (either OR or WA), and legally the person was entitled to continue collecting public benefits (even if most consider it unethical). It just depends on how the regulations are worded.

[milanessa]

I should mention this happened in another state (either OR or WA), and legally the person was entitled to continue collecting public benefits (even if most consider it unethical). It just depends on how the regulations are worded.

It would have been caught during her 6 month review in any case. She is not entitled to SNAP at this time.

What happened in another state?

[Civic]

A woman who won $1,000,000 in the lottery was still collecting $200 per month in food stamps even after she received her winnings. Amount the things she purchased was a second home, a new car etc all the while still receiving monthly assistance from the state. This is why I have so many reservations about the welfare system. There is just not enough oversight of recipients.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/a...t-off-by-state

With all due respect, I think very few welfare recipients wind up winning the lottery. So your reservations are based on the exception instead of the rule.

[Karina1974]

Only if that state has an income tax. Michigan does but the filing date is April 2012. Since she won the lottery in September 2011 that income wouldn't have been reported yet.

OK... why wouldn't it have been?

NY has an income tax as well, and the filing date is the same as for the Federal Income Tax. Our W-2 forms are sent out in January for the year previous and, thus, we New Yorkers are filing taxes for our income received during the entire year 2011. If this had happened in NYS that income definitely would have been reported already.

[milanessa]

OK... why wouldn't it have been?

NY has an income tax as well, and the filing date is the same as for the Federal Income Tax. Our W-2 forms are sent out in January for the year previous and, thus, we New Yorkers are filing taxes for our income received during the entire year 2011. If this had happened in NYS that income definitely would have been reported already.

I was talking about self reporting like when she files her state income tax form. She has until April 17th to do that. As far as the lottery sending that info to the state taxing authorities, yes, that's been done but they don't deal with it until an individual has filed.

[Buzz]

Here's some more examples of walfare fraud. This couple received a housing allowance all the while living in a multimillion dollar house.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow...161252749.html


Here is a scam that allowed walfare recipients to buy cocaine with the money they received.
http://www.itemlive.com/articles/201.../updates11.txt

[iloveemoticons]

I heard the reason was they base food stamps on monthly income, and since she has none (took the lottery money in a lump sum), they still gave her the food stamps. Seems odd though why they wouldn't also consider assets.

[milanessa]

I heard the reason was they base food stamps on monthly income, and since she has none (took the lottery money in a lump sum), they still gave her the food stamps. Seems odd though why they wouldn't also consider assets.

Michigan does have an assets test. She fails it now but was eligible when she originally applied.

[FigureSpins]

She's wrong, period, and should be held accountable. I don't know what the laws are, but if they allow people to win hundreds of thousands of dollars and still collect public assistance, it's time to make a change to the laws or the reporting/eligibility rules.

Interesting debate among my family: some feel that assistance recipients shouldn't be allowed to claim lottery winnings because any monies they have should be used to get off assistance. Someone countered with "Then, they'll just lie and have someone else claim it." Another family member said "But winning gives her the opportunity to better herself." Someone pointed out that she just spent the winning on luxuries, not bettering herself, by buying a second house. It was an interesting debate, still going on.


Here's what's odd (to me) about this story: The first video about it I saw showed a black woman outside her house. Last night, I saw a few angry Facebook posts with article links. The thumbnail photo showed another woman holding the big check.

Were there two different people abusing the system this week, or just the one story?

[Ziggy]

In my province a few years ago there was a massive audit of social assistance programs and allocations. It cost the government a fair amount of money to carry out, and was also very stressful for many of those receiving assistance, who had to resubmit documentation, go through interviews involving questions the agencies already had the answers to, etc.

The result of the audit was that there was no more fraud going on in the system than what was already being caught on a regular basis by the controls already in place. The cost of conducting the audit was also considerably more than the "savings" from cutting off those few recipients who were deemed ineligible after the audit.

Yes, that's exactly what I meant. It's been proven a number of times in the past.

There will always be individuals who abuse the system. But they are a very small minority and it infuriates me where they are used as an example for "the system not working" when the majority of those receiving assistance really do need it.

[milanessa]

Here's what's odd (to me) about this story: The first video about it I saw showed a black woman outside her house. Last night, I saw a few angry Facebook posts with article links. The thumbnail photo showed another woman holding the big check.

Were there two different people abusing the system this week, or just the one story?

Maybe it was the maid.

There are likely more than two people abusing the system any given week but Amanda Clayton is a young (24) white, single mother.

[milanessa]

According to the reporter who did the piece, the woman didn't do anything illegal. Just unethical.

I assume the reporter who's based in MI would have pointed out any illegalities if they existed.

Well, she may have broken one law.

The paper also quoted a spokesman for the Michigan Department of Human Services as saying that Clayton might have violated a state law requiring food stamp recipients to report changes to their income and assets within 10 days.

[JILEN]

I have to say shame, shame shame!

I think the Dept of Social Services which has every intention of helping people get back on their feet has the right to demand the funds back, every penny of it. The lady failed to report the change in her status or circumstance as required by law of any FS, SSI, TNIF recipients. It is almost similar to not stopping your unemployement benefits/checks from coming long after you have found a job, a more complicated example though but you know what I mean..

[overedge]

Here's some more examples of walfare fraud. This couple received a housing allowance all the while living in a multimillion dollar house.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow...161252749.html


Here is a scam that allowed walfare recipients to buy cocaine with the money they received.
http://www.itemlive.com/articles/201.../updates11.txt

No one is saying that there isn't welfare fraud going on. Just that it isn't as widespread as news stories like this might make it seem.

[milanessa]

Dredging up this old thread to say she died of an apparently accidental drug overdose over the weekend.

[aliceanne]

I saw that. Be careful what you wish for.

[Japanfan]

The agencies in my area are pretty predatory about finding/catching recipients they think are getting money they shouldn't.

I'm not so sure about that. I know someone on a disability pension who hasn't been checked for seven years. In the past it's seemed that Social Services check welfare and disability recipients' bank records from time to time.

The person I refer to has violated the rules by putting money into her account for her own usage - an amount that would have been seen as substantial by the government. Part of it was inheritance and part of it was an accident settlement. The rule is that when a welfare or disability recipient receives money exceeding what is allowed per month in terms of earnings or other monies, that money has to be reported and held in trust. A person on disability can receive their monthly allotment of $400 from that trust, but no more.

The person did have the money from the accident settlement in trust at first, but decided to take it out of trust to keep for herself. Then she put a small inheritance directly into her account.

This point of this rule is to prevent people from enjoying inheritance money or the like and still collecting from the government. If you get a sizable amount and want to use it as you like, you can't stay on disability.

But as I said, the government hasn't bothered to check on this person at all. She recently was contacted by Revenue Canada because she hadn't done her taxes for seven years and the additional monies would have factored in to her tax return.

So Social Services hasn't checked on her in seven years. This suggests to me that the system is overburdened and understaffed, and not able to ensure that checks and balances are in place.