Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Wrong as usual Jugg    Did Michael Cohen Commit Perjury In The Trump Trial? WWW.ZEROHEDGE.COM ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero Michael Cohen. He still has one day of cross examination ahead of him on Thursday. With the government resting after Cohen’s cross examination, I believe that an honest judge would have no alternative but to grant a motion for a directed verdict and end the case before it goes to the jury. Judge Juan Merchan will now have to give the full measure of his commitment to the rule of law. Given the failure to support the elements of any crime or even to establish the falsity of recording payments as legal expenses, this trial seemed to stumble through the motions of a trial. Michael Cohen was only the final proof of a raw political exercise. For critics, some of Cohen’s answers appear clearly false or misleading. Like their star witness, the prosecutors have shown that they simply do not take the law very seriously when there is an advantage to be taken.
    • So to sum up. 1.  You & your friend did the right thing on 28 December and are in the right legally. 2.  You are in the early stages of the threatening letter cycle.  We've seen these letters quite literally over 10,000 times.  For the moment your friend has nothing to worry about. 3.  No-one will turn up at your friend's door. 4.  If months down the line this got to court, you would win.  It's blatant disability discrimination.  Some time back I looked through the results of Excel v Caggers court cases, well we won 85% of the time, and you would be 100& certain to win. But this is the bit that you won't like ... 5.  Excel don't care that they are legally in the wrong.  They want your money.  They will go on and on with their letters hoping you'll give in. 6.  They are also the most litigious of the private parking companies and it's perfectly possible, months hence, that they will take your friend to court.  You have to be prepared for this.  They would lose.  But they don't care about the losses since, sadly, presumably so many people are afraid of court and so give in and pay.  7.  We will of course support you all the way!
    • Hi, Just updating that I'll be submitting the SJPN shortly this evening electronically.
    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Reporting tax and benefit fraud?


Deimos
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4760 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I am glad you took the chance to reply.

 

As has been mentioned by you and others, fraud is theft. That much is plain. No amount of patting on the back, no amount of saying you did it for the right reasons changes that. In my opinion, benefit fraud as it is at the moment, is a fairly new and developing blight.

 

A recent HMRC poll found that the majority felt 'everyone was at it', meaning the system was routinely defrauded. How have we arrived at this conclusion? Undoubtably HMRC has to shoulder the blame for not being robust with their penalites to start with, but now that they have begun to turn the screw the reaction seems to be 'how dare they! they won't dare prosecute you for stealing 18k'

 

Mental.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Well, I dont think benefit fraud is a new thing. I think it's always been going on. It's just the benefit depts are maybe getting a bit tougher on it now & they also have more powers to pin point it going on?

I remember a relative going to court for it yeeeears ago, I am talking about 20 years ago at least. They were on income support & their friend decided it would be cool if they both went to work part time temping. This was back in the day when they couldn't dip into your bank account at the drop of a hat. And I dont think the tax office was even connected to benefit dept like they are now. This relative was grassed up by an ex boyfriend, & DWP went to the temp agency they were working for & used sneaky means to look at their books.

The temp agency said to my relative if she had let them know they would have stopped them having a look! I guess they could stop them too then! lol

They went to court & had to pay back about 500 pounds. No criminal record for it back then though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct in saying benefit fraud is not new. The burroo (as it is known in Scotland), has been scammed since it began. However, areas such as Childcare (as this forum will confirm), child disability etc, these areas are new. This may be simply because assistance in these areas is new.

 

I think the fact that much of the contact with regards to benefits have moved away from face to face contact has had an influence. It is far easier to lie over the phone, tick a box, faslify figures when you don't have someone else there. My main concern is the moral acceptance with is apparent on here and out on the street. It would be interesting to conduct a poll as to where the line is drawn for some people regarding crime. Is tax evasion of 18k wrong? Is theft of 18k of tax credits wrong? Is theft of £100 from under a mattress wrong?

 

HMRC must undoubtably shoulder some of the blame for not starting Tax Credits with a robust system of penalties in place, but we cannot display mock outrage now that they are catching those 'at it'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who knows where the bounderies lie. Other depts have set it pretty much at 2k. If it's under that it's not fraud, if it's over that it is. Regardless of reason. Unless it's concrete that it's an official error, if it's over 2k, head to jail, hypathetically speaking. Not literally of course.

The child care element does seem to be causing the tax office the biggest headache it seems. No idea why, never claimed that one personally, as mine were youngest age 11 when I started working part time & claiming tax credits. Oldest was 13, but to be honest, putting my 2 in childcare would have drove them mad lol so I did leave them on their own at first, only saturdays as during the week they were at school.

Thankfully, the house didn't burn down & they are now 16 & 14.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With regards to the value of payments made under false details I can't say I have much knowledge. However, my own issue is that no value of fraud should be seen to be okay. The level that tax credits will prosecute at will be based on a cost/benefit analysis.

 

Geographical areas of high fraud are due to be targeted as mentioned in HMRCs own report. It can be googled for those interested.

 

My own area of interest and indeed my ongoing study and eventual career, is the psychology behind fraud and risk taking. This forum can make for compulsive reading.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It can. Sounds interesting. I am more into the miscarriages of justice at the moment, not benefit related. But ended up on here when a complience officer visited me at the begining of the year. Wondered what they were for, & been here ever since.

It's interesting how the threads have changed, at the time there were a lot of threads about people being called for interviews under caution, especially for living together but claiming as a single person reasons, now those have died down & it's the tax credit thing. Must be the time of year maybe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Before working and child tax credits it was Family Credit paid either weekly or 4 weekly and it was reviewed every 6 months based on the previous 5 weeks or 2 months wages, people could do as much overtime as the liked in the period that didn't determine their payments and the whole system didn't generate half as many errors. As soon as the Givernment declared the new Tax Credits system introduced in 2003 all processing officers (in DWP or Benefits Agency as it was known then) as well as Tax Credits Unit (or Inland Revenue as they were known then!) declared that levels of Fraud would increase but the Government decided that everything would work out for the best. 8 years on and how many people have had absolutely no problems with Tax Credits either through overpayments of Fraud?

Out of 8 years of claiming Tax Credits I have had 2 years of renewals actioned correctly without me having to query everything and sort it out myself!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yes, family credit, the kids dad & I claimed that when they were first born. It was very similar wasn't it. We had split & I was already claiming Income support during the time it changed to tax credits.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree with flumps. The tax credits system appeared to be Gordon Browns baby and could not be challenged despite the glaring inadequacies it presented immediately after its inception.

 

The system was, some may argue still is, wide open to abuse. Any business minded person will tell you that retro fitting is costly and unnecessary where an adequate original system was created. Regardless of thoughts on the current administration, they have recognised the disjointed mess that is the current benefit/credit system needs simplified for the sake of both those claiming and those administering.

 

Who knows what the universal credit will hold, it can't be worse than what we have...can it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many years ago i did report someone who was claiming and working. The only reason i knew was she dates my brother, had 3 kids none his, worked 3 part time jobs, and one of those she turend up to where i was working

and got herself a job, i couldnt believe it.

 

Went on to report her they did say if they prosecuted her i would get £50.00 told them i didnt want the money, they got her in the end, after several interviews, she denied it at first, but when they named all the 3 places she worked she couldnt deny it any more, got fined i think in the end, only knew from my brother telling me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you do actually get money for telling on people about benefit fraud, thats why a lot of people do it, £50 is a lot of money to people who havent got any, i still dont agree with reporting to the authorities, thats just the way i am im sorry if it offends people

Link to post
Share on other sites

No offence beachbird, each to their own. Personally, my view remains: if you have good reason to suspect somebody is claiming benefits whilst working then you have a civic duty to report that. We, the unemployed and disabled, are currently being castigated and lumped into a 'scrounger scenario'. This is purely - in my view - because people won't report. We want those lowlifes off benefits as much as anyone else. They are dragging us down with them. So, please report your suspicions...

Rae

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As far am I am aware people have not been paid any reward for reporting benefit fraud for quite a few years at least since JCP was rolled out 2001 unless it is different in different regions.

I don't think anyone should be rewarded finincially for reporting someone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The system of reward for reporting fraud is to either be revived or ultilised more regulary, which of these I cannot remember at the moment. I dont appear to have sufficient privileges at the moment to post a link, but HMRC and DWPs joint paper on tackling fraud highlights the possible adoption of this method to reward both individuals and 3rd party private companies who highlight areas such as undeclared partners.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DWP will also explore ways of encouraging more valuable calls to the National Benefit Fraud Hotline. We will look at both rewards and sanctions, implementing mechanisms to ensure that those who provide particularly valuable information to the hotline have their contribution rewarded, as well as seeking to put a stronger obligation on those who have information about a fraud to report the case. Alongside this, we will explore ways of integrating the work of HMRC more closely with the hotline

I have copied this from the Document, which is in the Public Domain.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wee fella,

What point are you making now.

We all know about fraud and reporting it.

You have already said you are studying fraud.

This site is for help and advise for people on benefits not for you to use for your research.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...