If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(KING 5 News)   While you were busy trying to make ends meet, a woman in Seattle has been collecting $1200 a month in housing assistance, along with food stamps and living in a 2,500 square-foot home, with gardens and a boat dock, that is valued at $1.2 million   (king5.com) divider line 162
    More: Interesting, Shelter allowance, Seattle  
•       •       •

20204 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Dec 2011 at 4:01 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



162 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-12-05 12:32:38 AM

ChuDogg: Looks like he has the house under his business name. Then has his "business" rent out a room for his wife. Since she's now "living on her own" she's her own household for applying for housing assistance and food stamps.

This hardly sounds like a legal loophole.

Chiropractors are always the biggest scumbags.


I don't know about housing assistance but with food assistance you have document your income, your spouses income, the property their either of you own, you even have to write down your burial plot and how much you paid for it. They do a whole assessment of financial worth. This alone should have killed the food money if she was telling the truth and I don't see how she would have gotten away with not saying who her husband worked for.

There is another loophole being exploited by members of the armed forces before they get shipped overseas. My friend told me how her boyfriend did it (and apparently it is common) but I can't remember how it exactly works. I believe he had a friend in CA that gave him the lease documents and he falsified information. So it looked like the person getting shipped out rented an apartment in CA so he ended up getting BAH during his whole tour in Iraq. Not only did he get his tax free money with hazard pay and such, he also had enough extra money to pay off his girlfriends Lexus and deck out their new place with nice furniture
 
2011-12-05 03:57:53 AM
Article with a lot more information, Link (new window)
 
2011-12-05 06:42:41 AM
At long last, Ronald Reagan's first welfare queen has been found!

Wait, she's white?

Never mind...
 
2011-12-05 08:37:41 AM

Stanton: You know, I recall hearing from my TPer parents how the rate of fraud in Medicare is 30% (highly dubious number, but let's pretend. they do...), so I'm dying to ask if they think we should shut down their Medicare too.



The Medicare fraud rate is in the 15% range ($60b/yr) according to that teabaggery hatemonger Obama attorney general Eric Holder.

The waste rate (fraud included) is in the 20-30% range according to the just-departed head of Medicare/Medicaid.

Your TPer parents may be whargy on other issues, but in this case they are fairly close to the mark.
 
2011-12-05 12:05:32 PM

xyzzy42: Article with a lot more information, Link (new window)


Thank you for posting this.
 
2011-12-05 03:29:34 PM

3steps: She LIVES in a house worth 1.2 mil.. She doesn't own it, she pays rent. $1200 a month.. too rich for my blood.. but I can't believe it's out of line for Seattle, WA.


It is out of line for Seattle. If you think you can find a water-front rental for $1200 a month in Seattle, then I have a nice new bridge in Tacoma to sell you.

I will ignore the rest of your comment because you don't know what the fark you are talking about.
 
2011-12-05 05:29:09 PM
umad
It is out of line for Seattle. If you think you can find a water-front rental for $1200 a month in Seattle, then I have a nice new bridge in Tacoma to sell you.

That's $14,000/year, which seems low for a $1.2 million property, but maybe this is perfectly legal. That's the real issue I have with this article- the tone isn't "person broke this specific law," it's "omg poor person has nice things!"

In other words,
s3.mediamatters.org
 
2011-12-05 05:47:24 PM
media.twenty-somethingtravel.com
 
2011-12-05 07:43:54 PM

Bathia_Mapes: cmunic8r99: Bathia_Mapes: gblive: Slam63: AHAHAHAHA!!!

I knows them!!

Maybe someone can do us the favor of posting her name and address.

All I am seeing on other threads about this news story is that "the story is obviously fake - give me a name & address then I will believe it." "No welfare fraud exists, etc. etc. This story is just a plant from the right wing extremists."

That's a bad idea. Fark's posting rules state that you aren't allowed to post someone's personal information in a thread, even if it's easily accessible elsewhere.

That's why I haven't done it already. Though, I did email the reporter that did the story to tell him the station's withholding the name but showing video of their home wasn't really helping their anonymity.

Please let us know if you get a response back from him. I, for one, would love to hear the station's rationale for withholding the names, but posting video of their home.


I got a message back from the reporter.

Here is the original email I sent him:


Mr. Ingalls,

This morning, I came across the story you filed about the welfare recipient living in the million dollar house. I'm writing not to complain, but to caution, about keeping the subjects of your stories anonymous. More specifically, in your the story the name of the people involved wasn't released because they haven't been charged with a crime. Personally, I'm OK with this policy. There is no point subjecting someone to public outrage until they have actually been charged with something.

In this story, however, the report was accompanied with video footage of the house in question. This footage, along with details from the story (she is married to a chiropractor, her neighbor is Mr. Thome), was enough for me to find out the location of the home, the property records for it, and all the information that comes with it. I found all this without actually looking into the court documents or at any other reports of this case (it seemed like more of a challenge this way). I was able to find this, despite having never lived in the Seattle area with no knowledge of the geography of the area, or any other information related to the case other than what was in the story. In fact, I live in North Carolina and have never been to Seattle. (The one thing I wasn't able to find in my search was the name of the woman that received the welfare assistance. I suppose I could look for the court documents to find it, but I'm not really interested in finding it.)

I haven't shared this information (other than the fact I was able to uncover the information).

Please keep this anecdote in mind when your station files stories and want to keep people's identities private.

To show I've discovered this information, I've included a link to the listing on the King County Dept. of Assessments website for the home from the story: (there was a link here)

Thank you for your time.

C.


This is the reply I received:

C.,

Thanks for the email.

This was all carefully considered by my newsroom before we aired the story.

We were not treating these people as if they were in the witness protection program. We wanted to offer a thin veil of anonymity to this couple, not the full meal deal that we might offer to various sources or crime victims who don't want to be identified.

Our goal was to withhold their identities from the average member of the public, not sleuths such as yourself!

Again - thanks for the thought provoking email.
 
2011-12-06 02:21:52 AM

cmunic8r99: Bathia_Mapes: cmunic8r99: Bathia_Mapes: gblive: Slam63: AHAHAHAHA!!!

I knows them!!

Maybe someone can do us the favor of posting her name and address.

All I am seeing on other threads about this news story is that "the story is obviously fake - give me a name & address then I will believe it." "No welfare fraud exists, etc. etc. This story is just a plant from the right wing extremists."

That's a bad idea. Fark's posting rules state that you aren't allowed to post someone's personal information in a thread, even if it's easily accessible elsewhere.

That's why I haven't done it already. Though, I did email the reporter that did the story to tell him the station's withholding the name but showing video of their home wasn't really helping their anonymity.

Please let us know if you get a response back from him. I, for one, would love to hear the station's rationale for withholding the names, but posting video of their home.

I got a message back from the reporter.

Here is the original email I sent him:


Mr. Ingalls,

This morning, I came across the story you filed about the welfare recipient living in the million dollar house. I'm writing not to complain, but to caution, about keeping the subjects of your stories anonymous. More specifically, in your the story the name of the people involved wasn't released because they haven't been charged with a crime. Personally, I'm OK with this policy. There is no point subjecting someone to public outrage until they have actually been charged with something.

In this story, however, the report was accompanied with video footage of the house in question. This footage, along with details from the story (she is married to a chiropractor, her neighbor is Mr. Thome), was enough for me to find out the location of the home, the property records for it, and all the information that comes with it. I found all this without actually looking into the court documents or at any other reports of this case (it seemed like more of a challenge this way). I was able to find this, despite having never lived in the Seattle area with no knowledge of the geography of the area, or any other information related to the case other than what was in the story. In fact, I live in North Carolina and have never been to Seattle. (The one thing I wasn't able to find in my search was the name of the woman that received the welfare assistance. I suppose I could look for the court documents to find it, but I'm not really interested in finding it.)

I haven't shared this information (other than the fact I was able to uncover the information).

Please keep this anecdote in mind when your station files stories and want to keep people's identities private.

To show I've discovered this information, I've included a link to the listing on the King County Dept. of Assessments website for the home from the story: (there was a link here)

Thank you for your time.

C.

This is the reply I received:

C.,

Thanks for the email.

This was all carefully considered by my newsroom before we aired the story.

We were not treating these people as if they were in the witness protection program. We wanted to offer a thin veil of anonymity to this couple, not the full meal deal that we might offer to various sources or crime victims who don't want to be identified.

Our goal was to withhold their identities from the average member of the public, not sleuths such as yourself!

Again - thanks for the thought provoking email.


Thanks for the update.
 
2011-12-07 10:10:15 AM
The problem with welfare fraud is not welfare. It's fraud. This woman's a simple crook; she was probably stealing from private citizens as well as the government. Saying we should cut government housing assistance because of this cheat is like saying we should get rid of banks because of bank robbers.
 
2011-12-07 10:20:31 AM

IgG4: EasyWind: feckingmorons: She's probably Irish.

or Methodist



Tel Aviv as a travel destination? Jewish for sure.



Followup article: (new window)

"By The Associated Press

SEATTLE -- A Seattle chiropractor and his wife live in a $1.2 million waterfront home and have spent the past eight years flying to Moscow, Paris, Israel, Turkey, Mexico and the Dominican Republic.

All the while, federal authorities say, the couple was collecting more than $100,000 in welfare.

Now, the U.S. attorney's office is suing David Silverstein and Lyudmila Shimonova, accusing them of filing false claims and demanding that the couple pay back more than $135,000 in federal housing assistance since 2003. Prosecutors are also seeking tens of thousands of dollars in fines.

In gaining Section 8 housing assistance, Shimonova represented that she lived alone with her two children and that her household assets were less than $5,000. Silverstein received the monthly benefits of $1,272 as Shimonova's purported landlord, the government said."


Lucky guess.
 
Displayed 12 of 162 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report