Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Claims that Fuller was getting WINZ assistance illegally

Natasha Fuller is the beneficiary who is getting $715.00 a week on the dpb to spend most of her day on message boards complaining she cant get the Training Incentive Allowance, despite boasting as being a fully trained private investigator..

She posts as the happy hocker – surely a spelling mistake – on message boards, as well as justyns.

There are claims on the message boards that Fuller was unlawfully collecting a benefit while living with her partner. If so, she should be taken to task for it because she would not have been entitled to it. Her high income partner didn’t give her much money. It is claimed that Fuller was on the benefit while living with her partner. I have not been able to verify that claim, as WINZ won't tell me (I didn't ask either). She got pregnant in June 2007, around about the time she was described as a sole mother who used a WINZ enterprise allowance to run a small business that failed. She also allegedly got a 10K WINZ grant to buy a car and have it signwritten for her business before crashing it and getting another one.

In addition she was given $200 a week to buy food when she lived with a partner. Her partner [ whom you can see here just before they split up ] paid for the mortgage because it was under his and his mums name. Now Fuller says she is “ over men so over being hurt and have decided that u just can’t beat a good vibrator:)”

One poster warned
You have stated on the forum board that you have been living with someone and collecting DPB, that is FRAUD. All of us that are paying taxes are paying for you to live the high life and boast about it.
She told the media she got $400 hair extensions around three months after her daughter was born. Apprently her daughter was born 3 February 2008. But on 4 February 2009, on a message board where she writes up to 10 messages a day, she said she had hair extensions for more than a year - if so, she may have been pregnant when she got the extensions.

Fuller says her partner left in December 2008 and that was when she said she applied for the dpb again. She says she doesn't want to work more than 20 hours. That’s because she may lose the benefit and the In Work Payment is less than the benefit, and you can't get both.

You can see Fuller on You Tube right here living the high life doing karaoke. She’s drunk. On her Facebook site she gloats that she spent more than $200 on CDs last month.

It is clear that on the dpb you can get up to $1000 a week: Domestic purposes benefit of $272,an accommodation supplement of $225 – ( Fuller gets $110 and a disability allowance of around $35 a week) , tax credits of $200, childcare assistance of up to $181 for one child, and out-of-school care and recreation assistance of $72 a week.

Fuller doesn’t deserve a training incentive allowance. But she should be able to lobby on government policies without ministerial meddling. However Labour shouldn't moan about it as it released Fuller's benefit details in Parliament in 2007. Hypocrites. **Further updates here**

Labels: ,



Blogger Just my opinion said...

Good work Dave. I bow down!!

July 29, 2009 at 8:28 PM  
Blogger David Farrar said...

Nice detective work. Do you have a link to the $200 spent on CDs? When was that?

July 29, 2009 at 9:04 PM  
Blogger Swimming said...

Yes (79)

July 29, 2009 at 9:25 PM  
Blogger FAIRFACTS MEDIA said...

Excellent work Dave.
I trust you tipped off the papers.

July 29, 2009 at 10:24 PM  
Blogger Unknown said...

You colonials, what are you like eh, you pay your taxes and then moan about how they are spent? Thank god we in the mother country don't have dole scroungers....wait a cotten pickin' minute...

Joking aside Dave what a very enlightening post, it lets us know, here in the UK, that giving taxpayers a kick in the balls is a universal pastime.


July 30, 2009 at 4:07 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is the disability allowance for her or one of the kids? I watched the singing video and while she was bad I didn't think it was bad enough to qualify for a disability allowance. If she is ‘disabled’ (by ANY definition) then I’m the Pope’s gay lover. This girl epitomises everything that is wrong with this countries ‘welfare’ system.

Nice to see the family videos online… I always wanted a video camera… family budget never quite went to it… maybe I made the wrong decision is choosing to provide for myself, seems the long suffering tax payer has far deeper pockets than I could have imagined.

July 30, 2009 at 8:31 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you view the Fair Go episode she was on, I think you'll find that the hair extensions she bought cost $450 NOT $400.

July 30, 2009 at 12:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dave you're a dork.
All these allegations are based on assumptions that Natasha was on the benefit before January this year and after her winz grant a few years ago, which she used to get into her own business. And which got her off the benefit, and contributing for quite a long time as an earning tax payer.
I understand (but like you have not been able to confirm) that she was not on the benefit when the offending hair extensions were put in.

July 31, 2009 at 12:27 PM  
Blogger Swimming said...

I have never claimed she was getting the dpb when she got the hair extensions. Neither have I assumed she was on the benefit at the time you have stated. However, others have claimed that she was living with her partner and collecting the benefit.

July 31, 2009 at 12:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just wanted to point out childcare sub is not money in your hand. WINZ pays this to the childcare provider and you pay the rest.
Don't include this as income. It isn't.

November 5, 2009 at 10:23 PM  
Blogger Swimming said...

Im well aware of that. That's why I didnt use the word income.

November 5, 2009 at 11:04 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

Powered by Blogger

Clicky Web Analytics