Does Lotto lout Michael Carroll deserve the dole?

macbee48 · 09-02-10, 11:17

Apparently he's now broke.

Story here.

Having blown 9.7 million does he deserve unemployment benefit?

Marion · 09-02-10, 11:34

Well I guess (not having read the story tho) that in spending it all he has contributed to employment. And he's probably paid at least some tax on his interest, so I guess he has "paid his dues" as it were.

Janet · 09-02-10, 11:50

Yes, he is entitled to his benefit if he's broke. What I think he was not entitled to was a lottery win when he was already an offender. According to that article, he "turned up to collect his £9.7million win wearing an electronic offender's tag". Why aren't the rules that that any money won from gambling or gaming while under judicial sentence goes in its entirety to the victim of the offence?

torrenter · 09-02-10, 12:10

This could open up a 'deserving poor' vs. 'undeserving poor' debate.

Jennie · 09-02-10, 12:13

He'll no doubt get it and if he's clever and claims for the trauma he endured by being a winner/loser lottery winner he'll probably get some more lumped on top. After all he was not equipped to deal with such a big win and someone else must be to blame for that.

Harumph!

macbee48 · 09-02-10, 12:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janet

Yes, he is entitled to his benefit if he's broke. What I think he was not entitled to was a lottery win when he was already an offender. According to that article, he "turned up to collect his £9.7million win wearing an electronic offender's tag". Why aren't the rules that that any money won from gambling or gaming while under judicial sentence goes in its entirety to the victim of the offence?

Yes I quite like that idea.

Periklês · 09-02-10, 12:35

At least most of it was distributed elsewhere, but my guess is that not all 'family and friends' were deserving cases. Perhaps they will give him some back.

From the article, you could understand that he still owned his expensive house. Does that not affect his entitlement to dole?

macbee48 · 09-02-10, 12:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Periklês

At least most of it was distributed elsewhere, but my guess is that not all 'family and friends' were deserving cases. Perhaps they will give him some back.

From the article, you could understand that he still owned his expensive house. Does that not affect his entitlement to dole?

As I understand it, you need to have less than 8K savings to claim benefit.

I'm not sure if that includes assets.

Apparently the house is derelict, the pool full of rubbish.

Marion · 09-02-10, 12:49

If it's his house that he lives in it doesn't count. In fact, if he has a mortgage on it I think he would get his interest paid.

Hopper · 09-02-10, 13:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janet

Yes, he is entitled to his benefit if he's broke. What I think he was not entitled to was a lottery win when he was already an offender. According to that article, he "turned up to collect his £9.7million win wearing an electronic offender's tag". Why aren't the rules that that any money won from gambling or gaming while under judicial sentence goes in its entirety to the victim of the offence?

I really don't understand this logic? Why can't someone who has offended be allowed to gamble? What has gambling got to do with any offence?

I never did understand the logic that said the guy who won the lottery and who had served time for rape had to pay his victim some of his winnings.

I AM NOT saying they shouldn't pay for their crimes, I would actively encourage stiffer sentences for them, however I don't see the correlation between doing a crime and winning a chance game.

Now if you were to say that anyone who commits a crime should have their assets seized to pay their victims no matter whether its gained from work (legal or Illegal), inheritance or a gambling win then I would be more inclined to agree with that.

As for Michael Carroll, if he's paid his taxes and his dues then I'm afraid he's entitled to it, no matter how distasteful that may be.