I request any willing people to help me out with how to go about defending/proving my innocence with being under investigation of benefit fraud for claiming Jobseekers Allowance (JSA).

I received a letter last weekend stating that I had that I'd been invited to an interview as 'a query' had been raised in relation to my claim. I've already been to the first interview (but wished I'd been on here first!)

I was asked to provide the following:

Dammit, I realise now that I think left the letter there with the interviewer at the first interview!

I was asked to show (if I can remember it correctly):

1. Passport
   
2. Driving licence
   
3. Utility bill
   
4. Tenancy agreement
   
5. Last 6 months of all bank accounts
   

I show them items 1 & 2 no problem.

No. 3: I don't have any utility bills which I receive through the post.

No. 4: I do not have a copy of the tenancy agreement. I was only able to obtain an amendment plus other seemingly non-essential paperwork from my father. When I asked for the original tenancy agreement as well, he only replied with, "this is all I have." I asked for him to get it please to which he walked away leaving the pile of papers behind. Not wanting to give up on at least this information I felt I could do no more since my name is not on the tenancy I have no way of obtaining it unless he does it (I have tried contacting the council before to find out my obligations but am hindered as my name is not actually that which is on the system so I am not allowed to obtain any information whatsoever).

I live with my father ( I am fully self-sufficient however and receive no help from him in any way whatsoever unless he's holding information from me) and we do not talk. He does not inform me of anything unless it's an emergency. So I do not see the yearly forms sent by the council to show council tax or rent requirements. In fact, last Sept he spoke to me only because the council were expecting some form of proof from me that I claim JSA. That's it.

So I the point I'm making is that I'm unable to obtain information from him unless he's willing to give it in the form he chooses, plus I'm not in a position to know what obligations are maybe expected of me until they are suddenly thrusted upon me by his lack of forethought. I have no idea re council tax (whether I am supposed to pay or not), or housing benefit (whether I get it, whether I'm supposed to deal with etc), plus there could be other things I have no idea about (unknown unknowns).

No. 5: I provided nearly all my accounts. I got as much together as I could over the weekend before I had to attend the interview. I got print-outs and asked some banks to send me the last six months' statements for those accounts which I could remember I had or had evidence that I'd had.

Admittedly I do not remember every single one since the amounts are now so low and it saddens me each time I look at them so I haven't checked the balances in about half a year or so. Some of the accounts, the passwords, pass numbers etc have been made inactive due to my lack of use on the accounts.

But yet a problem occurred when I rang one bank and I enquired about an ISA I thought I had. They informed me that I had no such things with them. I mistakenly believed this and now I know I did indeed have it once upon a time.

My claiming history:

I have been claiming from the end of 200X, with a week or so at the beginning of the year, up until the present period. I did have a break from all the stress of it all for about 4 months earlier last year. This 4 -month period will be explained later.

I was living in central London when I first started claiming when I was living with my partner. Things broke down and I managed to move back with my father (not a good choice, I know, but I didn't know of any other options at the time). I moved back and informed my local council of it and started process of claiming JSA from my current location.

I'm not sure if this was a result of me moving but the dates quoted to me by staff at local JC were different to what I'd previously been informed about - regarding when I would be moved from class 1 contributions-based JSA to class 2 income-based (IB henceforth) JSA. I told them repeatedly, whenever I went in person, about it not seeming quite right, whenever they stated these dates, but I was told that of course I didn't know more than they did. So I, maybe mistakenly, decided not annoy them further by pushing the point.

My claims for JSA went through. I've just checked over the statements of payments made in from back then and it seems they went in every two weeks so I really believe I only got what I was entitled to. I must add that I declared absolutely everything I could. I maybe didn't do it to the exact penny but certainly within a few pounds maybe an absolute max. of £100 off the actual figure. Basically, I disclosed my financial situation as best as I reasonably could. Any errors would have been for minor discrepancies in amounts of tens of pounds and not something like not disclosing an account.

The 4 months-ish break:

I did have a break after a debilitating experience when I was duped into doing a training course - I had gone along to show that I am skilled enough to not need to learn to type or do Excel (I am an advanced user; programming), or Word (I used to teach all these things myself) and when I got there I was told that they had a job I was perfect for. I could only apply for it if I signed a document saying I would do the course and since my skills are higher than anything they'd seen for this job I would have no problems all round. Of course I went to the interview and the job didn't exist. I was forced to attend a course for 13 weeks learn how to type and how to do other basic skills. I do admit these course are good for those in need of basic skills, however.

At the end of this tormenting period, I was told by the same advisor who duped me that the transfer to the JC had been done and in all honesty I was so low in confidence by then, that by the time I realised it hadn't I thought I needed a period not going through all that to increase my confidence again so I may indeed have a chance at an interview when I one day get one.

During this period I lived off my savings (I declared EVERYTHING of my savings when I first signed on) and by the end they had diminished to zero (well not quite zero, but only about £500 or so in total, offset that with the current account in debt, definitely in minus overall - and that's not including the credit card).

So I decided to go back on JSA when I realised I could not go on in this fashion.

When I rang up to continue claiming I informed them that I'd been claiming before but that there had been a period when I hadn't. I thought I would continue on with IB JSA, but they told me (I have no evidence of the phone call) that if don't claim for even one day then you start again from scratch. Yet when it went through they said it was a rapid re-claim ( I had previously been informed that this only occurs if there been a gap of six weeks or less and then you don't restart but continue with IB JSA).

I was put back onto contribution-based JSA and when I went to sign on I asked whether this was right since I had done no work, paid or unpaid (unless they count coaching/advising a friend how to get out of debt as work). They once more said don't worry as that is what the process is. So, again I didn't want to push the point in case it annoyed the person I had to visit fortnightly.

So for six months I claimed contribution-based JSA. Then, just after Xmas 2011 I filled out the form to declare that I wished to claim IB JSA. The only section in which, well I thought, anyway, was maybe where I made a mistake, was in the finances section. I stated the exact amount of my current account (in the red) and I put zeros down for all else.

Admittedly, my current savings accounts hold a grand total of about £60. I hadn't looked at these very much as I was well aware (and it had been made clear to me) that if I delayed with the form for too long then it would diminish the chances of getting any payments backdated to when the contribution-based JSA stopped (just before Christmas).

I know this was a mistake, but I thought it would be understood even if investigated, it also states in the rules that if you have below £6000 that no calculations are made to reduce the weekly amount contributed.

I thought that since my savings are so measly in comparison with this figure and that I risked missing out on at least 2 weeks contributions, I thought I ought to give it in before I potentially spent ages trawling through my bank accounts, further delaying the submission and, according to what I'd been told, diminishing the chance of getting the payments back-dated. I really need/needed the money since the interest I now pay is mounting and I need to put a stop to it.

The Investigation interview:

So then I got the letter wanting me in to attend this interview. I've attended the first one and I must say it seems ridiculous how awful how I was treated:

1. I was told of this interview being an amnesty so I could just tell them if I'd been fraudulent now to save me potentially ending up in jail;
   
2. 
   
3. I was told that anything I didn't submit (she didn't say what those were specifically) would only affect the amounts I receive or had received and I might have to pay back anything over-paid to me;
   
4. 
   
5. She added that in any case, my details would be passed to the fraud team to investigate and that anything I didn't submit would be used as evidence to say I'd committed fraud. Again, she added that she had been involved in a case last year, interviewing someone like myself, and he's now sitting in prison;
   
6. 
   
7. I asked for rules stating what I should submit as 'changes in my circumstances' in case something like moving money from one account to another constitutes enough reason to have to inform them, even if the overall amount does not change. However, I was told that I should listen to what she says and then I'll understand. I asked for how to get my hands on this information in a written form to refer to at a later date to stop any misunderstanding in future. I asked whether there was a website or something to refer to. I was told again that I only needed to listen to what was being said to me;
   
8. 
   
9. I asked for some written evidence or proof of me attending the interview and of what was said and what happened during the interview - I was told they would not be giving me anything in writing;
   
10. 
    
11. I was not offered at any stage to fill out the statement myself even though I said I'd prefer to write things down myself so that I know what is being written. this point of avoiding this choice felt clear, when at the end she got annoyed at me wanting the amend the statement from: 'I do not wish to write the statement and am happy for the interviewer to write it for me' to 'I am happy for the interviewer to write the statement for me'.
    
12. 
    
13. She got VERY annoyed at me wanting to take my time over the statement and make amendments as I wished. She added: you know what you take your time it's your ticket (I had asked to leave before the hour was up as I'd parked somewhere where I had to move after one hour - she initially acted as if I should be grateful. As I saw the next person to be interviewed wait outside just before the hour ended I realised that it would have ended before the hour was over anyway!
    
14. 
    
15. It was implied that I had been signing on for the whole of a year when in fact I'd only claimed for a week at the beginning and nearly 2 months at the end. It was stated as 'you've been with us since the beginning of 200X'; I stated that it wasn't right and she said nothing in response. I then clarified that I only claimed for a very short period right at the beginning, maybe a week or so. At this point she did state the dates which confirmed what I was saying was true.
    
16. 
    
17. When I stated that I don't know regarding the issues of council tax and housing benefit due to a hostile relationship with the account holder - my father- I was given the reply," well it can't be that hostile if he let you move back in with him."
    
18. 
    
19. when I asked for them to pause whilst I wrote down some facts, they only held back for 3-4 seconds each time
    
20. 
    
21. She kept rolling eyes, raising voice whenever I asked a question she did not want to hear, etc
    
22. 
    
23. I was asked to provide bank account details of some accounts more or less from when I first claimed. This includes which cover periods when I was either not claiming at all or was not on IB JSA - she specifically stated that I do not need to disclose information regarding savings under £6K when not on IB JSA. I added that all information regarding my savings I had declared earlier and that I have letters at home showing that I have declared it as such. I have a letter from the JC stating that payments were reduced due to me having savings. I also have another letter stating that I had declared the amounts of my savings;
    
24. 
    
25. One of my accounts I did not show ( I since got confirmation from the bank concerned that the advice I was given from the bank when I called them before the meeting, was false, and that the ISA had been transferred and that was the only reason why it was not showing at present). As a result she wanted me to write down the account no of two accounts which she wanted me to show the complete history of from when I had first claimed (end of 200X). It was then re-iterated that I must declare all accounts. I stated that I had called the bank and asked them for it but was told I didn't have. I added that since I don't look at my accounts due to the sad nature of no longer having much in them, I had just believed the person I spoke to at the bank when I was told I didn't have one. She noted down on the statement that 'the account may have been closed'
    


1. 
   
   1. interestingly, the 2nd of the accounts she asked me to prepare, I had brought with me. This time she wanted me to show them from when I had first signed on - I got the impression she was ignoring what I'd shown and had her own agenda
      

    

    

   [*]

   [*]I had to push her to write down certain statement which I wanted noted down. She then sometimes paraphrased them instead of writing them down as I'd asked them to be written as such

   [*]

   [*]She got very annoyed when I wanted time to go over what was in the statement I was being asked to sign

   [*]

   [*]in fact she got very annoyed several times when I asked questions

   [*]

   [*]She said that this was only the first meeting of this on-going investigation. I replied that the more meetings the better so I could have more time to prove my innocence.

   [*]

   [*]Overall I certainly got the impression that I was being pushed to 'give in' or just say that I'm fraudulent. I felt like I was being treated unfairly overall.

   [*]

   [*]I was told to get the information she specifically requested plus anything else that is important and contact her once I'd got it together

   [*]

   [*]She added that she wanted this dealt with before her going away in two weeks. I suppose she'll have a nice valentine break.

   Stuff I've prepared so far for 2nd interview:

    

   1. The statements for the accounts she specifically requested, for the dates she specifically requested (some statements I will receive via post in a week or so)
      
   2. 
      
   3. I've rung up every bank account I can remember to ask them for some written form of proof of the accounts I have or have ever had with them
      
   4. 
      
   5. For the statements I've not been able to print off, I rang the banks concerned and asked for bank statements for every account from June last year till now.
      
   6. 
      
   7. I've made photocopied of the letters I've previously received from Glasgow stating that I've declared my savings previously
      
   8. 
      
   9. I've made photocopies of letters showing adjustments to my payments due to me having declared the savings
      
   10. 
       
   11. I've rung Glasgow JC and asked for copied of my filled-out forms from when I submitted information regarding my savings to be considered for IB JSA
       
   12. 
       
   13. I think that's all I've done so far.
       

   Has anybody got any advice regarding how I should go about this?

    

   I feel so strongly about needing to prove my innocence and it is making me very anxious not knowing how on earth I go about ensuring I am not made a scape-goat.

    

   I will be happy to give more information if needed but I am aware of scaring away people with so much info in the first place. Should I perhaps remove this thread and do a shorter one to get more help, or is this the detail required to get help?

    

   Thanks ever so much for having the patience to reading this.

   
   

Hello there, welcome to the forum.

Your thread has had plenty of views, but of course not everyone here knows about investigations. Do you have any idea why they've asked you back?

I think it would help people trying to help you if you could put in some paragraphs and make the information easier to read. I have to admit I couldn't read to the end.

My best, HB

honeybee13: Thanks for highlighting that the paragraphs did not show up. I've now amended the post.

I have been asked back to provide specific details regarding two accounts -

1. For an account I did produce records for the last 6 months

2. For an account (which I was told didn't exist by the bank when I rang them up at the weekend!) which I did not show them.

For both accounts she gave me the account numbers.

In addition, I mentioned to her that I hadn't been looking at my accounts due to the sad nature of looking at them and seeing no money in them.

She then asked me to produce accounts for any other accounts I discover.

She didn't specify a time period for these so I have prepared and contacted all the banks to get the last 6-months' statement for them each and every one.

The statements are currently on their way to me in the post and should be with me in the next few days.

Does anybody know how to increase the line-spacing for the numbered lists?

Does anybody know how to increase the line-spacing for the numbered lists?

I wouldn't worry about that, the numbers seem easy to follow to me. It looks a lot better .

HB

Thanks for input honeybee

I'm sorry but I have tried to read your post 4 times now...there is just far too much information. What seems clear thought is that this is not a fraud investigation but a compliance interview.

They are, in a roundabout way, correct that this could be seen as an amnesty interview as if you are found to have been overpaid during their check you would not be prosecuted.

If you take out the irrelevant parts (rolling her eyes, bits about your relationship with your father etc etc) and just post the points relating to your claim and the questions that you have been asked I might be able to provide some advice..

kk3852: Please try to understand that if I knew what was irrelevant, then I would not have posted it. I was trying to explain how the way I was being treated could leave me to unsure of what I was being investigated.

Re the relationship with my father. I was trying to show how not being informed means I cannot answer simple questions such as, "Do you pay council tax?"

At no point was it stated that it was a compliance interview. I have nothing in writing from her to prove whatever she said, or I said, was what happened or exactly what it is that is being investigated. I did ask for something to show this.

Would it be perhaps better if I closed this thread and restart with little information and give the info as people ask? Does anybody have a suggestion?

You have been claiming since the end of 200x? What is 200x? I did read through it all & I may have missed the bit where you actually did anything wrong?

It's up to them to tell you what you are supposed to have done wrong. In a nutshell have they done that?

Jadeybags: thanks for your point. No they haven't told me what I've done wrong.

200x is 2008.

It is exactly that point of not being informed of what I am supposed to have done or even maybe have done wrong that is making me anxious.

As then I'm worried that they may say something that happened during the interview (of which I have no proof ever happened) is something to accuse me of.

But if I don't attend or don't bring the requested documentation with me, maybe that will be used to say I am hiding something.

If it is merely to investigate whether I have been overpaid, do they need to be so aggressive? Can't they just ask me to provide documentation as they have done in the past, without such an appointment?

That's why I'm trying to prepare myself to be informed of how to defend myself/prove my innocence, in case they try to make a scape-goat of me.

I am no longer able to edit the thread title. Is it down to the fact that I've amended it twice already?

Does anybody know how I can change the title now? I would like to amend it to show it may actually be a compliance interview.

Ok, from here it doesn't sound as serious as you may be thinking. If they haven't actually made it clear where they think you have gone wrong, it does sound a lot like a fishing expedition to be honest. Who knows what they are getting at! Did you even ask them?

I agree that it's probably just an investigation (that's done, really hopefully!, fairly.)

Unfortunately when I did ask her outright what the issue on which 'a query' was raised I was met with silence and then I listened to her repeat once more that I 'just needed to listen to what I'm told and all will be explained'.

I wasn't having ANY of my questions answered. I did ask a fair few.

She seemed to get angrier the more I veered away from what seemed like a dialogue she was reading from a card - one which allowed her to reveal and commit to statements as little as possible.

With this kind of response, as well as her raising her voice when I asked persistently, I would like to be prepared for more unreasonable responses.

Thanks for asking . Yes, I defo should have put this point in the OP :embarrassed:

Hi,

Did they state that this was an 'Interview Under Caution'?

Did they record it?

You need representation.

Could you ask your local CAB for both advice and representation?

Good Luck, and good night.

I'll re - read and post in more depth tomorrow.

Hi again Ginz,

When you were 'investigated', did they state that it was an 'Interview Under Caution', and was it recorded?

Thanks.

Hi lee100. No, it wasn't recorded. No it was not stated as an interview 'Under Caution'. Apologies for late reply.

I have spoken to some free legal advice earlier today. Will post update soon about outcome and advice given.

Update: Spoke to Community Legal Advice

They assessed whether I was entitled to free legal advice.

I was and put through to someone at a company for legal advice.

I was told throughout that my information would be kept fully confidential.

Key points:

• They cannot help me much until I get asked in for any 'Interview Under Caution'
  
• For the meantime, provide the information they ask for
  

2 points that my be the route of investigation

1. Whether I fully declared my savings back in Nov08
   
2. Notional capital
   


1. Why did I get rid of the savings I had
   
2. Maybe I have deliberately deprived my accounts to get benefits
   
3. In theory I can spend my money how I like but I may have to show that I did not spend it just to get rid of my money in order to claim
   

 

 

• If I get called in for any interview under caution then it would fall under criminal law
  
• I would then need a solicitor
  
• Everybody is entitled to 2 free hours of legal aid
  
• Thereafter is according to financial situation
  

I had explained that looking at the payments from the beginning, it looks as though I have received a reduced amount for the relevant stages. In addition I have proof I disclosed my savings.

He then went on to say that it's therefore more likely they will go down the route of 'Deprivation of Accounts'.

The legal services will send me advice on

• Deprivation of accounts
  
• Contacts numbers for some Legal Aid solicitors for when it gets to the 'Interview Under Caution' stage
  

Thanks! lee100 for the advice.

Hi,

You remind me of me, in that you are over - complicating things!

One question -

Were you 100% honest with the Council / Jobcentre Plus / the DWP, when you claimed?

ie - Did you disclose all savings when you claimed?

lee100: Yes, fully honest.

Don't have records that far back as I tend to keep 2 years' worth only. So I also don't have the letter I would have received from the JCP/DWP. I do have a letter proving as such for 2010, however.

lee100: Yes, fully honest.

Don't have records that far back as I tend to keep 2 years' worth only. So I also don't have the letter I would have received from the JCP/DWP. I do have a letter proving as such for 2010, however.

Hi,

OK. It looks like you've had good advice from the CLS.

You'll be fine, as this wasn't a formal 'Interview Under Caution'.

It's different to my experience, so it's best I don't advise, and you correspond with the CLS as you are doing. (I'm not a professional btw! Just had experience of an IUC).

Good Luck.

Update:

I have finally received all the paperwork from my banks.

I called and left messages yesterday x 3

I finally got through today after calling the third time.

She asked if the statements showed if the savings came to over £6K. When I said yes only then was she interested in making a follow-up appointment.

We agreed one. Then I added that I had paperwork showing that I'd declared my savings.

Her reply was, "I'll take a copy of that."

Now, why is it that she only wants to know if the amounts come to over £6K when I have declared this already?

If I hadn't mentioned the letters then would this have been omitted from the evidence?

If this is the sitation, then is it a case of I am guilty unless I prove myself innocent?

May I add that she once more was very rude on the phone call by continually talking over me. At the end she put the phone down on me mid sentence whilst I was saying thank you and see you at the appointment.

Update:

I have finally received all the paperwork from my banks.

I called and left messages yesterday x 3

I finally got through today after calling the third time.

She asked if the statements showed if the savings came to over £6K. When I said yes only then was she interested in making a follow-up appointment.

We agreed one. Then I added that I had paperwork showing that I'd declared my savings.

Her reply was, "I'll take a copy of that."

 

Now, why is it that she only wants to know if the amounts come to over £6K when I have declared this already?

 

Because it's relevant to any fraud or not.

 

If I hadn't mentioned the letters then would this have been omitted from the evidence?

 

Well, yes.

 

If this is the sitation, then is it a case of I am guilty unless I prove myself innocent?

 

Pretty much yes. It's a case of David & Goliath really. But it probably has to be?

 

May I add that she once more was very rude on the phone call by continually talking over me. At the end she put the phone down on me mid sentence whilst I was saying thank you and see you at the appointment.

That's just plain rudeness really isn't it.

Hi Jadeybags, thanks for the feedback

"If I hadn't mentioned the letters then would this have been omitted from the evidence?

Well, yes."

About this... the 'letters' refers to the paperwork I got from the JC themselves.

What I am actually afraid of here is why she is being so rude to me when I am 'playing ball' and doing everything asked of me.

If the letter showing I have disclosed my savings are actually from them then shouldn't they be part of my file anyway?!

And also, I did mention about having evidence of paperwork showing I had disclosed my savings in the first interview but was NOT asked to bring them in. When I tried to add them to the list of things to bring in, she talked over me and looked at me as if I was being rude by suggesting something she didn't want to acknowledge.

I did mention the letters on the phone today just before saying goodbye today so maybe she got annoyed at me mentioning something 'off topic' again?

If so, then is the 'topic' just one of trying to make me look like I've committed fraud?

Then just ask me to deal with the aftermath? i.e. disprove it?

It's becoming more and more the impression I am getting. If it is as such then surely she's not following her remit which must contain something about treating customers fairly, and this would not be an amnesty after all.

Additionally, I still don't know I'm accused of. Yet each time I try to discuss things that are not specifically what she's mentioned then they're treated with contempt so I don't know whether additional evidence I think shows my innocence will be used as evidence against or for me.

For example I have evidence from older current account statements showing that I received reduced JSA due to me having disclosed my savings.

I mentioned these also but was not asked to bring them in. Shoud I bring them? But this may annoy her potentially making my situation worse.

Any suggestions?

Hi Jadeybags, thanks for the feedback

 

"If I hadn't mentioned the letters then would this have been omitted from the evidence?

 

Well, yes."

 

About this... the 'letters' refers to the paperwork I got from the JC themselves.

 

What I am actually afraid of here is why she is being so rude to me when I am 'playing ball' and doing everything asked of me.

 

If the letter showing I have disclosed my savings are actually from them then shouldn't they be part of my file anyway?!

 

And also, I did mention about having evidence of paperwork showing I had disclosed my savings in the first interview but was NOT asked to bring them in. When I tried to add them to the list of things to bring in, she talked over me and looked at me as if I was being rude by suggesting something she didn't want to acknowledge.

 

I did mention the letters on the phone today just before saying goodbye today so maybe she got annoyed at me mentioning something 'off topic' again?

 

If so, then is the 'topic' just one of trying to make me look like I've committed fraud?

Then just ask me to deal with the aftermath? i.e. disprove it?

 

It's becoming more and more the impression I am getting. If it is as such then surely she's not following her remit which must contain something about treating customers fairly, and this would not be an amnesty after all.

 

Additionally, I still don't know I'm accused of. Yet each time I try to discuss things that are not specifically what she's mentioned then they're treated with contempt so I don't know whether additional evidence I think shows my innocence will be used as evidence against or for me.

 

For example I have evidence from older current account statements showing that I received reduced JSA due to me having disclosed my savings.

 

I mentioned these also but was not asked to bring them in. Shoud I bring them? But this may annoy her potentially making my situation worse.

 

Any suggestions?

Yes definitely bring them. Of course you should. Remember these people are used to dealing with people that are breaking the rules, their eyes may glaze over when someone states the obvious that they really should know about but it's not what they are used to hearing basically. I am just guessing there really, she may just be extremely rude. You may have been unlucky, the person I had an IUC with was a really nice lady, as was the compliance officer I dealt with. At the end of the day (scuse the annoying phrase) you know you haven't done anything wrong, it looks like you are going to have to go through all the motions to prove that yourself unfortunately...

Thanks ever so much for the input, Jadeybags.

No probs on the annoying phrase but I wish I could have faith in the 'if you've done nothing wrong then you've nothing to hide' type stuff. Tell it to the Meneses family.

Yet it is possible I have broken some minor rule (for example me not informing them when I had spent my money in trickles and not informed them), or, more likely, there's been an error in the system somewhere and I may made to pay instead of somebody else admitting the fault or wanting to spend the time and money investigating it.

Now, having to prove my innocence myself...

I can come up with two options of doing this:

1) provide everything at the compliance stage

2) Only giving what they ask for at the compliance stage and preparing my own file of everything I have to show my innocence.

Reasoning:

2) My reasoning for maybe not showing anything they don't ask for is that if they do indeed just want to 'frame me' then potentially they could use my additional information and factor it into the story that's going to be created to make me look like a criminal.

Ultimately, if they want to frame me there's little I can do to stop them trying. By giving them all my evidence I am also letting them know of my defence. For example if they create a case whereby I have never disclosed my monies and then I suddenly provide evidence of doing that categorically, won't that then be more effective?

1) Alternatively, it may just be her that's a meanie and if I provide everything, when it goes up the chain, it will be treated fairly and hence nip it in the bud before it gets serious by going to the IUC stage.

Any thoughts on these avenues of approach will be appreciated.

Hi GinZ,

You remind me so much of myself, when I was being investigated.

Don't give this rude Woman any more energy. When contacting them, just ask to deal with someone else.

As for your evidence, take everything and then some.

Try not to over - analyse all outcomes. It's tough I know, as I've been there.

We can't control how other people behave sadly!