Deceased/Not Found UK - Margaret Fleming, 19, Inverclyde, Scotland, 17 Dec 1999 *Guilty*

[Shiressleuth]

I can try, what names and dates am I looking for?

Margaret Cairney, born 1944, died 2004. Port Glasgow, or Inverclyde or Inskip or Greenock I guess. Any info like maiden name and names of children too.

 

[easynic150]

Margaret Cairney, born 1944, died 2004. Port Glasgow, or Inverclyde or Inskip or Greenock I guess. Any info like maiden name and names of children too.

Her maiden name is Stewart


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bluebird69]

Maiden name is pattison b.1944 m. 1963 d.2004 mil of ec had Maiden name Stewart

 

[Shiressleuth]

Maiden name is pattison b.1944 m. 1963 d.2004 mil of ec had Maiden name Stewart

Ok. Any children of either mc or ec or aj or mf (mother or daughter) ?

Am wondering if those children (if there are any) ever saw MF when they visited mum n dad?

 

[Satchie]

Ok. Any children of either mc or ec or aj or mf (mother or daughter) ?

Am wondering if those children (if there are any) ever saw MF when they visited mum n dad?

Police have said they've contacted more than 1,700 people and agencies looking for evidence. Also, if EC & AJ had anyone they could bring forward as witnesses, I'm sure they'd have done so.

Avril had family in the village, including her parents, who won't speak to the media. She must have had a story about where Margaret was, but if EC/AJ made any claims in the past about where she'd gone, that contradict their current story or can be proven to be false, that'll definitely be used to build the case.

In other cases of disappearance I've followed, police talk publicly about their search for that person, but not about the intense sleuthing of the suspects they're doing behind the scenes. People who knew or had suspicions might not have been willing to go to police to report it, but may not protect the suspects once they're questioned. It doesn't provide enough proof to lay charges , but it can narrow down a time frame and MO to focus the investigation..

 

[CoverMeCagney]

Just read this in my local rag, shows it's not impossible to claim benefits on someone's behalf without checks:

A MOTHER who failed to declare her disabled son had died and fraudulently claimed more than £85,000 in benefits for six years after his death has been jailed.

http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co....led-son-for-six-years-after-he-died-1-8807570

 

[Ironside]

The hovel has been sold to property developers

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/home-missing-margaret-fleming-flogged-11362314


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Taskforce88]

Just read this in my local rag, shows it's not impossible to claim benefits on someone's behalf without checks:

A MOTHER who failed to declare her disabled son had died and fraudulently claimed more than £85,000 in benefits for six years after his death has been jailed.

http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co....led-son-for-six-years-after-he-died-1-8807570

And yet some genuine claimants are dragged over the coals for something minor.

 

[Shiressleuth]

So far I have found no death notice for Margaret Cairney in 2004. Has anyone else found anything?

Did anyone find a death notice/obituary for EC's wife?

 

[MelmothTheLost]

And yet some genuine claimants are dragged over the coals for something minor.

That depends on the situation of the person being claimed for I would imagine. Some conditions, such as severe congenital disabilities, would never improve and once a claim has been established there'd be no reason to periodically reassess that individual. Other conditions show patterns of improvement and deterioration and I would expect claims relating to those to be monitored and periodically reviewed.

Many of the cases you see where the claimant is complaining about regular reviews or is caught out relate to conditions that are very difficult to assess objectively, eg "bad backs", ME and fibromyalgia, which can be exaggerated by the claimant.

In Margaret's case I would have expected social services/DWP or whatever to carry out periodic reviews, as though her learning difficulties were obviously present since birth she had been attending various classes to help prepare her for more independent living so her situation was likely to change over the years.

 

[Shiressleuth]

That depends on the situation of the person being claimed for I would imagine. Some conditions, such as severe congenital disabilities, would never improve and once a claim has been established there'd be no reason to periodically reassess that individual. Other conditions show patterns of improvement and deterioration and I would expect claims relating to those to be monitored and periodically reviewed.

Many of the cases you see where the claimant is complaining about regular reviews or is caught out relate to conditions that are very difficult to assess objectively, eg "bad backs", ME and fibromyalgia, which can be exaggerated by the claimant.

In Margaret's case I would have expected social services/DWP or whatever to carry out periodic reviews, as though her learning difficulties were obviously present since birth she had been attending various classes to help prepare her for more independent living so her situation was likely to change over the years.

Thats not necessarily true. My OH was on incapacity from age 50 due to cardiomyopathy and retired on an ill health pension. At age 62 it was transfered to ESA lasting only 12 months. They would not change the decision and we appealed right up to Tribunal stage. MP involved - whole 9 yards. DWP finally said they were wrong and paid £7k back benefit. Has happened to many people. The woman who did the paper assessment of my OH case turned out to only be a RN not even a doctor. It is probably the change to ESA that caught on to the fact MF was missing. In this case the system finally showed up the anomaly. Not having seen a doctor for 17 years should have rung alarm bells somehow before that though.

 

[Laughing]

And yet some genuine claimants are dragged over the coals for something minor.

How on Earth were these "people" paid to "care" for Margaret when she had not seen a doctor for a decade???

That little criteria could be set up as an automatic computer check. No routine wellness check, NO BENEFIT CHECK UNTIL RESOLVED.

Pardon me for shouting, I expect everyone reading here feels the same way.

SO sorry, Margaret, that "the system" let you down!

 

[Laughing]

Thats not necessarily true. My OH was on incapacity from age 50 due to cardiomyopathy and retired on an ill health pension. At age 62 it was transfered to ESA lasting only 12 months. They would not change the decision and we appealed right up to Tribunal stage. MP involved - whole 9 yards. DWP finally said they were wrong and paid £7k back benefit. Has happened to many people. The woman who did the paper assessment of my OH case turned out to only be a RN not even a doctor. It is probably the change to ESA that caught on to the fact MF was missing. In this case the system finally showed up the anomaly. Not having seen a doctor for 17 years should have rung alarm bells somehow before that though.

Hey, ShireSleuth, can you spell out acronyms the first time each is used? I think that MP is your Member of Parliment, but the alphabet soup in the USA differ.

Looks like we agree on the government's responsibility to look after people who need that!

Thanks!

 

[Shiressleuth]

Yeah, sorry I thought everyone was Scottish on this thread and would know:-
OH other half
RN registered nurse ( also Royal Navy )
ESA Employment & Support Allowance
DWP Dept for Work & Pensions
MP Member of Parliament (also Military Police)
and from an earlier post of mine
Peely wally. Feeling/looking ill.

HTH you know of course.

 

[Laughing]

Yeah, sorry I thought everyone was Scottish on this thread and would know:-
OH other half
RN registered nurse ( also Royal Navy )
ESA Employment & Support Allowance
DWP Dept for Work & Pensions
MP Member of Parliament (also Military Police)
and from an earlier post of mine
Peely wally. Feeling/looking ill.

HTH you know of course.

Thanks! I'm ethnically Scot, Welsh, and Irish but want to be sure I understand you!

:seeya: waving across The Pond

 

[Shiressleuth]

Thanks! I'm ethnically Scot, Welsh, and Irish but want to be sure I understand you!

:seeya: waving across The Pond

:wave: from West Wales.

 

[Lilibet]

Yeah, sorry I thought everyone was Scottish on this thread and would know:-
OH other half
RN registered nurse ( also Royal Navy )
ESA Employment & Support Allowance
DWP Dept for Work & Pensions
MP Member of Parliament (also Military Police)
and from an earlier post of mine
Peely wally. Feeling/looking ill.

HTH you know of course.

BBM

OT— You need to bring that expression (and more) over to this thread of British expressions.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?353010-Dead-Giveaways-You-re-a-Brit

 

[Laughing]

Say, is peely-wally more like doolally, or more like verklempt?

:laughing:

Yes I do amuse myself sometimes... but where is Margaret, Avril???

 

[Shiressleuth]

Say, is peely-wally more like doolally, or more like verklempt?

:laughing:

Yes I do amuse myself sometimes... but where is Margaret, Avril???

Yes, rhymes with doolally not lolly. :smile:

 

[Taskforce88]

That depends on the situation of the person being claimed for I would imagine. Some conditions, such as severe congenital disabilities, would never improve and once a claim has been established there'd be no reason to periodically reassess that individual. Other conditions show patterns of improvement and deterioration and I would expect claims relating to those to be monitored and periodically reviewed.

Many of the cases you see where the claimant is complaining about regular reviews or is caught out relate to conditions that are very difficult to assess objectively, eg "bad backs", ME and fibromyalgia, which can be exaggerated by the claimant.

In Margaret's case I would have expected social services/DWP or whatever to carry out periodic reviews, as though her learning difficulties were obviously present since birth she had been attending various classes to help prepare her for more independent living so her situation was likely to change over the years.

Yep I agree, but not so much to reassess the individual, it would be to ensure the individual is still alive and being treated well too.