tomtom256
-
Posts
415 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
9
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Post article
CAGMag
Blogs
Keywords
Everything posted by tomtom256
-
If you have not been formally charged i.e. had a formal caution (not an interview under caution), agreed to an administrativepenalty or been to court then there is no need to list it at this stage. Obviously should they prosecute then it could cause issues further down the line, if the job requires a clean CRB check. How long ago did you get the overpayment letters as it can be a few months after that before a decision is made on the criminal aspect of any investigations. Also if it's DWP's lead it could be considerably longer as CPS are rubbish.
-
Notification of Customer Compliance Office Interview
tomtom256 replied to UnmoderatetheNet's topic in Benefits and HMRC
Sorry but is this thread a wind up? -
No they do work on that basis, they are not judge, jury or executioner. They should remain impartial and present the evidence obtained and get an explanation for said evidence. The law works both ways and to presume guilt is pointless as it blinkers the investigator.
-
It's no different to LHA and private renters, just makes the playing field fair for those that cannot get social housing but are in the same boat as those that can i.e. you get the help for the rooms you actually need. Obviously those with carers etc needed looking at under different criteria, but the average Joe has similar if not the same needs.
-
So what about the capital issue you raise in the other thread? Two different stories, which one is correct?
-
Looks like they believe you have deprived yourself of the capital in order to claim benefits. How much capital did you receive and blow in the 3 week period in question?
-
incap stopped (due to investigation) HELP please
tomtom256 replied to topCatDC's topic in Benefits and HMRC
That is exactly what a DM would do under ESA or have in the majority of cases I have looked at. Incap is slighlty different which is what the OP is on, however the DM will still generally go down the permitted work route if it fits all the criteria. Obviously if they are over the hours/earnings threshold then it is a different kettle of fish. I know the story has changed to suit, but until the IUC they will not know what FIS has. -
incap stopped (due to investigation) HELP please
tomtom256 replied to topCatDC's topic in Benefits and HMRC
As long as it falls within the type of work that is permitted and the earnings isn't over the threshold limit your allowed to earn, then the DM should class it as permitted work regardless of whether you informed them or not. You may be open for a civil penalty for not informing them but no too sure if they are handing these out yet. It will all be down to what FIS has received from your employer and/or bank statements they may have obtained. -
Don't be forced into moving in together as it's a big step. But from what you say it would appear he may be at yours more than his so could be more beneficial in the long run. With regards to paying money back. As long as you don't admit or agree he has been living with you x amount of time then there should be no overpayment as your entitlement won't have changed. I presume he is on DWP benefits also, carers allowance with IS top up perhaps from what has been said and reading between the lines? If so it should just be a joint claim and a simple change of circs.
-
I presume it's compliance you are seeing. If you have done nothing wrong tell them what you put above. You can of course move your partner in and claim as a couple, they would probably still want a statement for past period. By all means move him in if it's for the best and going to suit your needs going forward, but don't be forced into it. I don't think your benefits would change that much as a couple, depending on what you both get.
-
A statement is not taken at an interview under caution. They probably just want what you have stated about your boyfriend coming round. If he has his own place he is liable for and paying bills at they cannot find you living together. They will do whats called an MF47 which will state that "I receive (whatever benefit) as a single parent (or whatever reason you receive said benefit for), my boyfriend, Joe Bloggs, visits my house/flat everyday as he is a carer for my daughter he stays so many nights a week but lives in his own property (insert address) where he is liable for council tax and pays all the bills. I now that if he moves in with me I must notify the DWP of this immediately. I am also aware of other changes in my circumstances I must notify the DWP of whilst claiming benefits". This will then be held on file and should the issue arise again or evidence be forthcoming in the furture this may be used against you.
-
Check this link, basic guidance that all FIS officers should follow http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/fraud-guide-interview-under-caution.pdf Arranging appointments section.
-
incap stopped (due to investigation) HELP please
tomtom256 replied to topCatDC's topic in Benefits and HMRC
So your story has already changed from just sitting in an office chatting to doing what you see as permitted work. They would have a QB9 wage enquiry completed by the employer if they have paid you anything for your "consultaing" which will show any hourly rate and hours/days worked etc. All I can advise is get your story straight as to what happened and if you think it was permitted work stick with it and you should ok, unless the earnings, if there is any or if the hours worked is above the permitted threshold. -
That does not mean you cannot get legal aid, it just means the DWP will not fund it. You are free to go and enquire about legal aid. I would raise a complaint regarding the IUC letter as it would appear they have gievn the wrong reason for the IUC if it was a living together offence and not a working whilst claiming. They have to tell you by law what the IUC is for and failure to do so or give an incorrect reason is a breach of PACE and is gross misconduct. As for performance related pay for fraud investigators we wish. But that appears to be one of the urban myths on these boards. You can appeal the decision at court, CAB will attend for this and often do as you generally don't get legal aid for appeals as it's not a criminal offence it's a civil one.
-
Things can't be done a different way, if an offence is believed to have been commited any further contact has to be under caution as potentially the outcome could be court, so anything said has to be recorded to cover all concerned. It's also not crystal clear from the outset of an investigation of what has actually happened, as with most cases evidence normally collected appears to show guilt. Once you hear both sides of the story and get a claimants explanation this occasionally changes things as they can explain why you might have x, y or z. The point of an IUC is to obtain the facts.
-
I'll tell you what then, I will remove my advice and make it easy for all and then we can just listen to the idiots, which from some posts is apparent they have no understanding of how the system works! I could also be all of the things you mention, but I get nothing out of it so what would be the point in lying.
-
I'm trying to help as I am a fraud officer and state facts, my last post was tongue in cheek regrading the so called bonus we get.
-
You could just ring them and ask to postpone/rearrange for a later date so you can get legal advice. Not rocket science. I don't think mick57 has a clue about IUC's or fraud investigations to be honest.
-
Yes and at 5 Guilty case we get a crate of Champagne and for 10 guilty cases we get a Porsche! I currently have 5 porsches on my drive and a garage full of champagne.
-
Evidence collection is the only reason. They don't just call people in on a whim, they need evidence to put to you prior to an IUC.
-
That case you mention if it exists is different to a living together case and still is not the normal way the DWP investigate. Do a FOI regarding arrests and you will see it is something they shy away from, although a trial was had earlier in the year to see if raids helped cases, however as stated it is not common practise unless serious and organised are involved. A local FIS team do not routinely do this. Let me have the details of the case and I will look it up on FRAIMS on Monday morning.
-
If it's not commercial there would be no entitlement to HB full stop. If you are liable for council tax then CTB is still payable if you meet the criteria.
-
When you gor for your interview, just say what you said above. Potentially it could go to court, but that would depend on the amount of overpayment. General rule is over £2k for court action. Under £2k its generally an administrative penalty. I presume it's over £2k though, hence the interview? It's a policy thing. What where you claiming as it will be nilled for the period you had over £16k? You can work out the potential overpayment for that period. Did the DWP know you had between £6k - £16k as this affects amount of benefit awarded also? If not this will increase the overpayment.
-
That is nothing like a normal DWP investigation unless the serious and organised team are invovled. It certainly is not normal for a living together investigation. Surveillance yes, kicking the door down police raid no. Only in extreme circumstances would this be authorised by a magistrate.
-
You don't have to go, however normal policy is that if you fail to attend they will just prosecute you based on the evidence they have obtained. The general ruls is three invitations to attend and then passe the case to the Legal dept. On a side note the overpayment and pay back are the civil side and the how and why are the criminal side. The civil side has been sorted, they now want to sort the criminal element.
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS