Benefit fraud

[clampchamp]

Afternoon all..........

 

Had a letter drop on the mat addressed to the wife,

telling her she has to go to an interview at the local jobcentre.

 

 

we split up last year, and I moved up country.

She followed me up and brought my children with her.

 

 

She found herself a house with a local estate agent, and

claims Housing Benefit, Council Tax Benefit, Working Tax Credit, Income Support, and Child Benefit.

She also works part time, which the jobcentre are aware of.

 

 

Top and bottom of it is, I've been living here, and working pretty much all the time I've lived here, but the jobcentre weren't aware of this.

 

Now look, I know we're in the wrong, and we've had a massive row over it,

 

Obviously, judging by what I've read about them, the "good" people at the Jobcentre are going to try and make my wife admit everything,

I would have thought.

 

 

A friend of mine got done a little while ago, and he didn't get the letter that we had,

the benefits agency turned up and took his wife away for a meeting at the jobcentre.

The letter we've had just said that they have reason to believe that they suspect she's been committing benefit fraud

by living with someone as a partner/co-habiting.

 

Surely, if they had solid evidence, they would have sent a nice man round to take her away, like they did with my butty??

 

Now, we've had a discussion about what to do/say at the benefits office, and we've decided that the best thing to do is to go along,

see if they have any evidence (and what it is) and then,

depending what they say either tell the truth,

or leave the interview, then go legit immediately........

 

My wife wanted to go legit first thing monday morning, but surely this would just arouse their suspicions even more than they are already??

 

I understand that as long as the case doesn't go to court, there won't be a criminal record, right??

 

Plus, can they drag me in for questioning as well??

Wifey has already said that if they do,

I'm to deny all knowledge, she'll take full responsibility. (which is nice of her)

 

Like I said, I know we're in the worng, and we've been caught out, (edit nowt we can do about it)

but I really don't need to be bitched about on the forum...............

Any advice you can give would be gratefully received, thanks.

Plastic Taffy

Edited October 24, 2009 by ErikaPNP
bypass of the swear filter

[yourbank]

Honesty is the best policy

[clampchamp]

Maybe honesty is the policy, and I would guess it will be looked upon favourably if she is honest, but what does that mean will happen?? Obviously, we'll have to pay the money back, but what else is likely to happen?? We'll be paying it back, and that will be that, or what??

[ErikaPNP]

It would depend largely on the level of fraud committed. In some cases, the money claimed fraudulently will be paid back and a record placed on her benefit account. In other cases, an admin charge is payable, and in some cases they prosecute.

 

They don't always take people away for interview - normally they do send a letter, asking the suspected person to attend an interview.

 

Be aware that if it is an interview under caution that they probably already have plenty evidence. You'd be surprised what they have access to. If they have this evidence and she continues to deny it, the penalty will be far heavier.

 

They can ask you to attend an interview too.

 

Although we appreciate that people make mistakes in life, and we can provide support, and advise how these interviews are conducted etc, this forum doesn't support any type of fraud so I have to be clear that if the intention is to gain advice in how your wife can deny the fraud and appear as a legitimate single claimant, you won't get that advice here.

[clampchamp]

Thanks Erika!!!!

 

 

I don't think the intention is going to be to lie, in all honesty.

If it was me, I'd lie through my teeth, but my wife isn't that kinda lady!!!

 

 

we're just worried that it's going to mean courts, prison, kids into care and all the rest of the things that come along when a crime is committed.

 

 

Up until the last 12 months, we've both been law abiding citizens, and we just thought we'd take a chance!!!

It kinda went wrong for us when we split up, (money issues, mainly, and my lack of faithfulness)

and we just thought that we'd try and get ourselves back on our feet by doing this. Jesus, I wish we'd done it by the book!!!!

[ErikaPNP]

In an interview under caution what they tend to do first is show her the claim form she signed and go through the conditions of her claim. They will then ask her if she wishes to say anything. If she says nothing or denies any wrongdoing, they will bring out further evidence against her. They can get hold of an array of information. Bank statements, details of loans applied for, utility records, DVLA records, the list is endless. They may also have surveillience material. The more she denies it, the worse the penalty tends to be if the evidence shows she has lied throughout.

 

If she admits to it, she will be given an opportunity to say why she committed fraud. The motive is also a deciding factor in any penalty, or whether the case progresses to court.

 

If she fails to appear at the interview, or denies any wrongdoing, they can prepare a case for court if they have enough evidence.

 

They don't always prosecute, particularly in cases where the person is honest from the beginning. Again, a lot of this would depend on the level of fraud commited.

[clampchamp]

So, to quote yourbank from up there ^, honesty prolly is the best policy.......... So best to admit it once the claim form has been shown, or wait and see what evidence they have??

[clampchamp]

By the way, I'm guessing that you work for the DWP or an agency that works with/for them?? Coz you are very very good with what you are telling me............ Neither me notr my wife feel nearly as bad as we did when the letter arrived this morning!!!!

Thanks very much for your help, and your quick replies!!

[ErikaPNP]

I'm guessing that you work for the DWP or an agency that works with/for them??

That's a common thought around these parts! The other misconception is that I am a long time benefit claimant because I know how the system works. All the information is out there, you just need to know where to look. I learned through helping people who were having problems with their benefit, and unable to deal with it themselves, and became fascinated with the system and how it works. It also helps to have contacts, and feedback from people who have been there.

 

I'd advise honesty from the outset.

[clampchamp]

So don't even wait for the evidence to be shown?? Just go in and bend over??

[clampchamp]

Do you think we ought to go legit monday morning?? Or wait til after the interview??

[ErikaPNP]

If it were me I would be honest from the moment the office opens on Monday morning, as I'd be aware of the chances of a lesser penalty. Either way she could be punished severely but when a fraudulent claimant demonstrates compliance from the outset, the penalty is often far more lenient than if the pretence is continued and the evidence stacked against her. Not a chance I'd take.

 

Even if, for argument's sake they had absolutely no evidence whatsoever, and your wife continued to lie about being a single person, they believe her and no further action was taken, they can revisit the case at any point in the future, and delve deeper Far harsher penalty.

 

I can't tell you or your wife what to do. I can only say what I would do in that situation, having seen the outcomes of other people. I've seen far too many people who think they have managed to fool the fraud department, only to see them caught out at a later date, and believe me, the penalty is a lot harsher.

 

On the other hand, I have seen many people accused of living together as husband and wife when they are not, but the evidence gathered and shown during the IUC makes it look as if they are - there are threads on here about it also. Now these people are innocent but as far as the fraud investigation service are concerned they are guilty as sin because the evidence tells a different story. They are seen to be "evading" and the cases are dealt with accordingly.

[clampchamp]

Looks like a phonecall to the Jobcentre monday morning. It'll be an admission of guilt, but, like you said, it might turn out a little better for us in the end. Any idea what the percentage is of cases that actually get to court?? My wife works in a management position for a large chain, and so really doesn't want a criminal record........

I was always aware that IS and H/CTB were actually paid separately from different sources, ie, IS comes from the DWP, but Housing Benefit etc came from the council. Surely this means that the fraud case should only correspond to IS??

[ErikaPNP]

Not necesserily. The DWP and the LA can and do work together on cases where they suspect fraud, and are duty bound to share information.

 

I'm unable to provide an answer in regard to what percentage of cases get to court, as obviously this changes frequently year on year, and would vary depending on the benefit claimed and the type of fraud committed. Your best bet for up the most up to date information would be to submit a freedom of information request but this can take some time to be answered.

[clampchamp]

You're great, you are, thanks for your time!! I'll post on here once the interview has happened, let everyone know what the outcome is. Thanks very much!!

[ErikaPNP]

No problem. What I think you really need to consider is that you have absolutely no idea what their evidence is, and not all evidence is always shown at an IUC as it could compromise any potential prosecution case. You need to consider if you want to take the risk of continuing denial against the unknown.

 

A lot of people are absolutely shocked at what details they have access to. I myself have been investigated in the past (years ago) - I had nothing to hide, as my claim was above board. I didn't get as far as an interview under caution; it was compliance, and I was asked to provide documents in support of my claim. This is basically when a member of the public has reported you or an officer comes across something which doesn't add up but they have no evidence against you whatsoever, and they ask you to provide documents in support of your situation. I provided all the documents they asked for and also wrote a covering letter explaining the documents I could not provide. I had nothing to hide so I wasn't worried but still, it was a horrible feeling.

 

In this stage, there is no or very little evidence, it's a case of something either doesn't add up, or a (often mallicious) report. They don't waste resources when it comes to fraud and if they get a report they will look into the claim to see what they can find. If they find nothing to indicate fraud, then they ask the claimant to provide the documents and deal with it that way.

 

On the other hand, if they find an indicator of fraud when they look into the case, they dig a little deeper. They can access all sorts - bank accounts, joint loans that have been applied for (even if they were not granted) utitilies, DVLA records, NHS registrations, employment details and much more besides. In some cases they will also place the suspect under surviellence. Once they have finished their investigation, if they have enough evidence to show tat fraud has been commited, they will invite the claimant to an interview under caution, and possibly also (or this can happen earlier or later) invite any suspected partner in a single claim in for an IUC. So when it gets to the stage of an interview under caution, they have already gathered (usually strong) evidence of fraud themselves and you are called in. No interview under caution occurs where there is no evidence. So they will have evidence. How much evidence and whether it is strong enough to prove fraud is anyone's guess.

[sandraroff]

bite the bullet!!! you have nothing to lose. and do let us all know how it all went.

 

you shouldnt have done, but then you know that, however, i am thinking of you.xxx

[clampchamp]

Thyanks Sandra. The interview isn't til tuesday week, (2nd) so it'll be a while before we know what'll happen.

[clampchamp]

Well, wifey has been to the interview.

Truth was told, in full.

 

 

The benefits lady was apparently fairly human, and understood completely why my wife hadn't declared me living here.

They're only counting her IS in the total amount overpaid, so it works out at less than 400 quid.

 

 

They only tend to prosecute in Northants if the overpayment is over £2000.

Rung the council the day after the interview, declared me living here and registered for a council house, too.

 

 

The benefits lady reckons that the worst my wife will get is a formal caution, so not really the end of the world....

....not as bad as it could have been anyway!!

 

 

If anyone else is in this situation, be warned, the Jobcentre can, and will look to see if your (possibly undeclared) partner is working anywhere.

They had the name of my previous employer, and an approximation of my yearly salary!!

They also knew that I had spent some time at my fathers, had his full name, address, DOB, the lot!!!!

And my father has NEVER even claimed dole!!!

 

 

These people are VERY switched on, and if you're fiddling them,

they will catch you out sooner or later!!!!!!

 

 

Now all I have to do is convince my sister-in-law to go legit!!

 

 

It wouldn't surprise me if she gets caught out now, coz the jobcentre decide to look into the rest of my wife's family..................

Edited November 8, 2009 by clampchamp