Court date for 2 counts of benefit fraud

[nichola2424]

Hi hope someone can help me as I'm due in court on the 20th of may and I'm really ****ting myself and am a nervous wreck.

I came about applying for job seekers allowance a month after my job came to an end in November 2011 I put on the form that I was claiming for a single person that being 'me' and that I had a mortgage so assumed they knew I was living with someone else, truth being is I wasn't at the time I was separated and he was living at his mums but still paying the bills etc.

In February we then decided to give things another go for our little girl and see how things went which I failed to let the dwp know, hence the trouble I'm now in.

I also whilst making the claim did not mention the bank accounts I assumed were joint and mainly in my other halfs name to my horror they weren't I forgot this because while opening these accounts in October 2010 my other half did not have his national ins number with him so they had to be put in my name but wasn't my money.

Hence another reason they're taking me to court.'

There saying i defrauded them deliberately and in all took £3,254.45p from them which I am currently paying back at £100 a month.

I'm so scared at whats going to happen on the 20th of may and what I'll get and just how scary it is at the magistrates court. Also when I went for my interview under caution at the Jobcentre regarding this they were putting words in my mouth and made me say things I shouldn't of said like I meant to do it from the off and that I knew what i was doing, these were such aweful human beings.

[firstclassx]

I'm so scared at whats going to happen on the 20th of may and what I'll get and just how scary it is at the magistrates court. Also when I went for my interview under caution at the Jobcentre regarding this they were putting words in my mouth and made me say things I shouldn't of said like I meant to do it from the off and that I knew what i was doing, these were such aweful human beings.

 

Well that is why you should listen to the caution they give you, i.e. you don't have to say anything. Bit late now, but future visitors may well benefit from this advice.

 

You can't really blame anyone but yourself for this. They aren't awful human beings, they are doing their job, which is to interrogate and interview. They seem to be good at that - to the point you've given a full, recorded confession, probably fully compliant with PACE, admitting you intentionally defrauded, from the outset, the taxpayer and DWP.

 

Suspect you will need to plead guilty in order to mitigate this mess or instruct a VERY good solicitor, quickly.

 

What advice do you specifically want though? Expected sentence? Possibility of prison etc?

 

Conviction is likely to result in a low-medium level community order. (As long as no other benefits are involved, i.e. JSA Only). If other benefits are involved, likely to be High Level Community Order to 6 weeks imprisonment, (if the total is under £5,000).

 

Title: Theft

 

Offence: False representation to obtain benefit

 

Legislation: Social Security Administration Act 1992

S111A dishonestly making a false representation

S112 making a representation known to be false

 

Mode of Trial: S111A either way

S112 summary only

 

I'd recommend, based on what you've said, pleading guilty and making an apology in court. Take some friends/family with you for support.

 

A solicitor, IMO, is not going to be much use - unless there is a procedural error which hasn't been identified.

Edited May 4, 2013 by firstclassx

[honeybee13]

Hello there, welcome to CAG.

 

I agree with firstclassx that you probably need a lawyer. Have you spoken to the CAB where you live? I expect they will have come across this before and they will have also legal contacts in the right field. You could also look on the Law Society website for expert lawyers where you live, or the Community Law Centre.

 

My best, HB

[krsrejm06]

hi I am going through similar atm . Firstly the amount wont get you a custodial/prison sentence .

if you plead guilty the court will be a very simple case lasting perhaps 15-20 minutes its not scary its quite an informal room with 3 magistrates . As you paying it back that's good too ! Mitigation in a magistrates court isn't massively beneficial so make sure your solicitor is aware of the reasons and get any evidence to back it up asap .

You will probably get a fine if your able to pay it , a short suspended sentence or a very small amount of unpaid work .

My case was more financially and has been refered to the crown court Horrible situation to be in no point anyone lecturing you you will have already done it to yourself 100 times - goodluck.

[LifeIsAMess]

I'm involved in a fraud case myself at the moment though it's yet to be taken to court. I've only received a letter stating an overpayment so far. My case is very complicated so much so that they don't even have any notes on the system as to how they came about their decision, however, the following points may help you.

 

First off...did you take anyone with you into the interview? if so it's important you have them to back up your version of events such as them putting words in your mouth. There is certain tactics they are not allowed to use. They did at mine and I'll be taking action against the FIS once mine is over and done with.

 

In the past Courts have found the following situations, which occurred

within IUC’s, to have been oppressive. This list is by no means exhaustive

and should be used only as a guide by investigators:

• excessively repeating a question in order to gain an admission

• using abusive language

• shouting at or bullying the suspect

• constantly interrupting the subject

• repeatedly accusing the claimant of being guilty or of lying

• going over the same ground again and again

• seeking to break down the suspect’s denials by misrepresenting the

evidence held

 

Also it is NOT fraud if not done and planned from the outset. You say your partner was not living with you at the time therefore it's up to them to prove that. This should be put down to negligence and failing to report a change in circumstances.

 

Did you try and appeal before it got to this stage?

[firstclassx]

Also it is NOT fraud if not done and planned from the outset. You say your partner was not living with you at the time therefore it's up to them to prove that. This should be put down to negligence and failing to report a change in circumstances.

 

 

The OP already said that she admitted, under caution:

 

... things I shouldn't of said like I meant to do it from the off and that I knew what i was doing

 

Now, unless she can get the interview deemed inadmissible, (which she won't, the court just may not put as much weight on it), she is facing the more serious end of the sentencing scale.

 

Surely these interview are audio recorded? Even if written on an MG11, the suspect is still given an opportunity to sign the MG11 to confirm everything is true on penalty of perjury.

 

If people do not like the way their interview is handled, why do they not simply say, "Enough - I'm leaving". If it's anything like the prosecutions performed in the railway industry, it's always remarkable how many offenders give a statement quite reasonably and leave on good terms, but, once they get a summons, all of a sudden they were bullied and harassed into confessing. (Usually after realising it is more serious than they originally thought).

[LifeIsAMess]

The OP already said that she admitted, under caution:

 

 

 

Now, unless she can get the interview deemed inadmissible, (which she won't, the court just may not put as much weight on it), she is facing the more serious end of the sentencing scale.

 

Surely these interview are audio recorded? Even if written on an MG11, the suspect is still given an opportunity to sign the MG11 to confirm everything is true on penalty of perjury.

 

If people do not like the way their interview is handled, why do they not simply say, "Enough - I'm leaving". If it's anything like the prosecutions performed in the railway industry, it's always remarkable how many offenders give a statement quite reasonably and leave on good terms, but, once they get a summons, all of a sudden they were bullied and harassed into confessing. (Usually after realising it is more serious than they originally thought).

 

I'm assuming she didn't mean to do it from the off as her partner wasn't living with her at the time therefore how could she? It's not as easy as it might seem to just get up and say "enough, I'm leaving"...I didn't like how mine was handled but I stuck through it and it was only afterwards after going through it in my head and with my advocate that I began to realise that certain things should have been handled differently. I was bulled and traumatised. I was led to believe I would be getting invesigated further under the RIPA act which led me to believe my phone calls were being listened to and I was being followed in my car. This stressed me out so much to the point that I was involved in a high impact collision with another car, one which the police and paramedics said I should not have walked away alive from. I later learned the RIPA act is for serious cases of crime, fraud and terrorism and did not apply to me. The FIO conducting my interview should NOT have told me he was going to do this when he had no intention of doing so. This is just one example of them behaving wrongly.

 

Also I believe if a confession is given at the IUC a caution is supposed to be offered there and then and if a caution is given no prosecution can take place? Maybe I'm wrong. I'm still in the early stages of mine.

[tomtom256]

I'm assuming she didn't mean to do it from the off as her partner wasn't living with her at the time therefore how could she? It's not as easy as it might seem to just get up and say "enough, I'm leaving"...I didn't like how mine was handled but I stuck through it and it was only afterwards after going through it in my head and with my advocate that I began to realise that certain things should have been handled differently. I was bulled and traumatised. I was led to believe I would be getting invesigated further under the RIPA act which led me to believe my phone calls were being listened to and I was being followed in my car. This stressed me out so much to the point that I was involved in a high impact collision with another car, one which the police and paramedics said I should not have walked away alive from. I later learned the RIPA act is for serious cases of crime, fraud and terrorism and did not apply to me. The FIO conducting my interview should NOT have told me he was going to do this when he had no intention of doing so. This is just one example of them behaving wrongly.

 

Also I believe if a confession is given at the IUC a caution is supposed to be offered there and then and if a caution is given no prosecution can take place? Maybe I'm wrong. I'm still in the early stages of mine.

 

Sorry just because you admit does not mean they would give you a caution there and then. The case is reviewed on how much was frauded, amount of time and extent of how the fraud happened. An admission would get you a caution if below the prosecuation threshold (usually cases under £2k), it will also help get a lesser sentance should court action being taken as courts would class it as admitting guilt at the earliest opportunity.

 

As for RIPA it can and probably has been used in your case, although not to the extent you believe, fraud is classed as a serious crime! However the DWP and LA's are not allowed to listen to telephone conversations or listen to conversations in the home/private areas. They can watch your property, take photographs and follow you or your alleged partner to work etc (if its a living together and/or working whilst claiming case). However this type of follow doesn't happen often as they don't have the resources.

 

If you feel that the crash can be attributed to them get a copy of the tape and/or transcript and if it is in their then they may have been oppressive and/or lied which is a potential breach of PACE. They have to be factual about what they put to you, they are not allowed to fish.

[LifeIsAMess]

Sorry just because you admit does not mean they would give you a caution there and then. The case is reviewed on how much was frauded, amount of time and extent of how the fraud happened. An admission would get you a caution if below the prosecuation threshold (usually cases under £2k), it will also help get a lesser sentance should court action being taken as courts would class it as admitting guilt at the earliest opportunity.

 

As for RIPA it can and probably has been used in your case, although not to the extent you believe, fraud is classed as a serious crime! However the DWP and LA's are not allowed to listen to telephone conversations or listen to conversations in the home/private areas. They can watch your property, take photographs and follow you or your alleged partner to work etc (if its a living together and/or working whilst claiming case). However this type of follow doesn't happen often as they don't have the resources.

 

If you feel that the crash can be attributed to them get a copy of the tape and/or transcript and if it is in their then they may have been oppressive and/or lied which is a potential breach of PACE. They have to be factual about what they put to you, they are not allowed to fish.

 

Well the paperwork I received is clearly out of date then. Something else I'll be pulling them up on.

 

I know fraud is classed as a serious crime but I don't believe for one minute RIPA was used in my case. I'm 99% sure he said he would be investigating futher under the RIPA act AFTER the tape had stopped running. I will need to get a copy of the tape to clarify this but in a future phone call with him he did tell me the further investigation he undertook which was simply writing to my alledged partner so no he did NOT use RIPA after saying he would therefore I consider it to be a scare tactic of some sort. I even said to him if he had done more investigating maybe he would have found out we were actually not a couple to which he replied "I can't discuss this any further" Anyway my appeal was sent off today, I had a mental health worker with me at my IUC so they can't deny anything.

 

Not trying to butt in the OP's thread...just saying if you think if you have been treating unfairly during your IUC or after regardless of what you admitted take action and seek legal advice NOW.