Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • https://www.bindmans.com/news/neale-v-dpp-the-right-to-silence-citizens-duties-and-coronavirus-regulations   Perhaps the OP should have said nothing - and risked arrest!   "Firstly, the case calls into question the logic behind aspects of the criminal justice response to the public health crisis created by the Coronavirus pandemic...   "Secondly, it is clear that some police officers have misunderstood and misstated their powers, and citizens’ obligations, under the Regulations and at common law...   "Thirdly, the case confirms reasonable excuses for being outside are not limited to those explicitly set out in the Regulations. Police officers considering whether there are reasonable grounds for believing that an offence has been committed under the Regulations so that an FPN may be issued, or the reasonable grounds for suspicion that are necessary for an arrest, should give proper consideration to any explanation given by members of the public (and what a court might think of them) rather than only recognising those exceptions explicitly listed in the Regulations and/or government guidance...   Fourthly, the case is an example of a failure of the CPS review into prosecutions brought under Coronavirus Regulations, which has found that alarming numbers of cases were wrongly charged..."   Above quotes from the Bindman's article, not the decision.  Case arose from the first lockdown and was in Wales.  Same now?  Also was about not being at home - not mask wearing.    
    • No the first LBA was delivered by royal mail, but I responded by email, sorry if I didn't make that clear.   I look at redacting the emails tomorrow, got to get some sleep now.   Thanks
    • ok well that changes things alot. you've accepted one before by email  and now they are doing it again ..   might have shot yourself in the foot until now lets get some 1st aid done.   gonna be a pain to redact but i'm gonna need to see all the emails in/out please in ONE MULTIPAGE PDF from/inc  date of their last PAPLOC   redact them properly !! read our upload guide carefully   you may  think this is immaterial, but its not, esp important is their and your exact wording
    • OK I've looked back at my emails and it appears I've been dealing with shoosmiths since the start of 2019 when they sent a LBA that I'd totally forgot about.   I replied that I didn't recognise the debt and we got into a big letter tennis over the facts.   They then went quiet and then contacted me again in April 2020 asking for income and expenditure details to work out a payment plan with them.   After I responded with my covid comments they went quiet again.   And now they are back with another LBA and I haven't responded to that.   Hope that clears it up. 
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Being Investigated for Benefit Fraud


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2462 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Bit of a strange one , but I will try and keep it as brief as possible.......

 

Received a letter requesting my attendance at a benefit fraud investigation, and that it would be under caution (and taped).

 

Went today, and not sure what to make of it to be honest.

 

They claim I did not report a change in circumstances 4 weeks after making the claim in 2009.

 

In 2009 I lost a business, was left jobless, and instead of claiming dole, went self employed to make a fresh start. I informed the local council I had no income, and as such, received full council tax benefit (now called council tax reduction ).

 

As with many businesses, I started off making a loss, and continued to do so for 3 years (albeit improving over the three years).

 

Approximately 6 weeks after starting self employment, I did start to make regular DRAWINGS out of the business, even though there was no profit to support it. I was simply taking money to pay bills, out of the business. I was able to do so, and keep trading, due to a combination of the overdraft facility, favourable credit terms from suppliers, and eventually a full factoring facility.

 

I had also declared Child & Working Tax Credit.

 

The local council claim that these DRAWINGS were to be classed as income, and as I had not informed them, they believe fraud has taken place.

 

I argued that my INCOME was classed as my share of the PROFITS, and if i had drawn more than the profits supported, then in effect this was a loan that was repayable on demand, and therefore no income.

 

They argued I was wrong, but every time I stated that if I have made a loss, then I have had NO income, they replied, your income is your DRAWINGS.

 

I then suggested, in theory, if my share of the profit was £100k, but I chose only to draw £20 per week, would I receive CTR, as I was drawing only £20 per week, and therefore that was my income? They declined to answer....

 

After 45 minutes, the interview was ended as we both agreed that the conversation was going around in circles, and it all hinged on what is classed as income. They are sending the evidence to some assessor, and along with the councils solicitors, they will decide whether to prosecute.

 

I have since spoken to my accountant, who categorically states that incomes is defined by your share of the profits, and drawings are immaterial, whatever the amount. If I overdraw, then the excess is classed as a loan, as it is payable on demand!

 

I genuinely believe I have done nothing wrong, but felt I could not get my point across, and that they did not understand. One of the interviewers claimed that she had a degree in accountancy practices, and that she knew what she was talking about, but when asked, she would or could not define the difference between drawing and profit.

 

The question is does anyone know where I stand in all of this? I will be seeking the advice of a solicitor later next week, but based on my accountants point of view, he believes I am right

 

Any advice would be grateful

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/296092/dmgch15.pdf

 

You need to read the above - I think that the paragraph relating to business accounts was 155234 onwards (I tried to remember the number and might have got it mixed up) It continues into personal drawings from the business.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Loans are often taken as income for benefits purposes, even if they have to be paid back at a later date. Student loans being a case in point. The duty is to declare any income while claiming benefits, and it is up to the agency (LA or DWP) to decide whether that income affects your eligibility or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand where you are coming from with taking advice from your accountant but he is viewing it from the accountancy/taxation point of view. What's relevant in your case is how the benefit regulations treat income.

 

I hope you resolve your problems soon

Please do not ask me for advice via PM as I will not reply.

Link to post
Share on other sites
this case may be useful to you

 

 

 

Many thanks for this, looks a little promising!!!

Edited by antone
Fixed quote tags, content not changed
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Result!!

 

Finally received a letter confirming that they agree with me! They cant class drawings as income, and income (self employed) is purely based on share of profit.

 

Many thanks for peoples suggestions and input, gave me a bit of comfort, but never knew for certain until today....

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quick qustion

 

Do you have to inform the DWP as to any student loan??

 

In general, yes, you should inform them. It may or may not affect your benefits (depends on which benefits and your specific situation) but if you're ever in doubt, let them know.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Result!!

 

Finally received a letter confirming that they agree with me! They cant class drawings as income, and income (self employed) is purely based on share of profit.

 

Many thanks for peoples suggestions and input, gave me a bit of comfort, but never knew for certain until today....

 

Cheers

 

Thanks for letting us know the outcome - it helps others who might have the same issue.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quick qustion

 

Do you have to inform the DWP as to any student loan??

In short yes.... It might not count but best to report all changes and let the benefit office tell you if it affects your benefit

Please do not ask me for advice via PM as I will not reply.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...