DADADEL
A Kentish woman, who hasn’t worked since she was 18, received roughly $150,000 in government benefits. But, that wasn’t enough. She had one more request for the taxpayers.
Anna Broom, 33, relied on government assistance for 14 years, having been jobless since 18. With an estimated $150,000 received, she sought more. Despite already receiving over $1,000 monthly with her fiancé, 39-year-old Jordan Burford, she requested an extra $13,000.
Dubbed “unemployed bridezilla,” the Gillingham resident sought taxpayer funding for her lavish wedding. Desiring a designer dress, shoes, a horse-drawn carriage, and a castle celebration for 50 guests, she also aimed for a honeymoon in Mexico, totaling $2,500.
The Kentish woman argued that her extravagant wedding and the experience of being a bride were fundamental human rights, asserting that her weight rendered her unfit for employment. Despite labeling her request as a “loan,” she failed to outline a feasible repayment plan, as her sole income stemmed from taxpayer-funded government benefits. Broom conceded her inability to repay the full amount and proposed splitting the cost.
Having departed school without qualifications, Broom contended that marriage would bolster her fragile self-esteem and rekindle her motivation to seek employment. “I’m stuck in a rut at the moment and can’t find the motivation to lose weight, but if I was getting married, I know I’d slim down because all eyes would be on me,” the Kentish woman remarked.
Broom started her career journey at 16 as a nursery nurse, dedicating two years to the role. However, she left after feeling passed over for a secretarial position, which she attributed to biases. Despite efforts to secure other jobs, rejections led her to lose motivation, resorting to overeating instead. Consequently, her weight surged to 240 pounds within a year.
At just 19, Broom was deemed unfit for work due to depression and back pain stemming from her weight issues. This status granted her a monthly disability living allowance of nearly $600. Additionally, she received a joint housing benefit of $260 with her partner, Burford, who himself received around $174 monthly in income support. Neither Broom nor Burford held employment; Burford, diagnosed with epilepsy, had never entered the workforce.
The couple’s encounter at a local pub sparked instant affection, marked by what Broom described as “love at first sight.” Two years later, Burford proposed, presenting a “lovely” ring adorned with “a gold band with a pink stone.” Inspired by glossy magazines and wedding shows, Broom eagerly delved into planning her extravagant celebration. Her vision, however, came with a hefty price tag she believed should be covered by others: “I want the taxpayer to fund my £10,000 [$13,000] dream wedding,” she insisted.
For Broom, matrimony represents a fundamental entitlement. “It’s a basic human right to be a bride. I don’t see why I should have a small wedding at a registry office — I wouldn’t be able to fit in all my guests and a church wedding is far more romantic,” she asserted. “I’ve dreamed about being a bride since I was 12 years old,” she added. “I deserve a fairy-tale church wedding and a party in a castle — but there’s no way I could afford it on benefits, and I can’t work because I’m overweight.”
Anna remained steadfast in her desires, unfazed by her circumstances. While her groom envisioned a limo and a cream suit, she dreamt of feeling like royalty on their special day. “I picture myself in a silk dress that shows off my cleavage, as Jordan likes my boobs!” Anna shared, emphasizing her affection for her partner’s preferences.
“I’d like a long veil and sparkly red designer heels, and I want two bridesmaids and flower girls scattering petals down the aisle,” she elaborated on her vision. “We’d serve posh prawn canapes, a roast dinner, and champagne. I’d have around 50 guests with a five-tier cake and a big buffet too. I’d also love a big band.”
Broom found herself dismayed by her inability to afford her desired lifestyle, despite not being employed. She expressed her disappointment, saying, “I was gutted. After we’ve paid for bills, a night out at the pub, dog food for our Labrador, cigarettes, and the odd kebab, there’s barely anything left.”
Expressing her disdain for a budget wedding, she remarked, “I’d rather not get married than have a cheap do — it’d only make me unhappy. Even if I only got £5,000 [$6,500] in vouchers to put towards the wedding, that’d make life easier.” Though details of how she funded her wedding remain undisclosed, social media suggests Anna Bloom and Jordan Burford eventually tied the knot.
Recent updates suggest that the couple has parted ways. Anna Bloom Burford’s Facebook profile indicates she’s now in a relationship with someone named “Vinnie,” implying that the funds she sought for her wedding may have been destined for a failed marriage.
The Kentish woman seems to have enjoyed a life of undue comfort for too long. Those who toil understand the importance of budgeting and setting priorities. She could have foregone pub nights, cigarettes, and indulgent snacks to finance her wedding or opted not to marry at all. If she didn’t prioritize her wedding over these luxuries, why should taxpayers? Government assistance is meant as a safety net, not a perpetual source of comfort, allowing for a 14-year hiatus from reality and responsibility.
