Interview under caution, will it go further?

elaina79

It really annoys me that tax credits and other people can so easily get things wrong but it's always us that ends up paying.

Hope all is well with the baby, I see your due date was yesterday.

SkyWatcher_3

Sorry, I'm new to this forum but I can help to clarify in this case. I have stated the facts below for interest. I don't pull any punches because this is a very serious subject.

It sounds to me like the original poster has done the sensible thing - going to the interview (cases are more likely to go to Court if you don't turn up) and requesting written clarification are sensible steps as this is potentially a criminal matter. I would have also advised proper legal representation from a solicitor at the interview (not the CAB). I can't comment on whether the signing the penalty agreement was the right this to do. The Council were obviously satisfied that the change ahdn't been reported and were prepared to proceed to Court with the case. They couldn't offer the penalty if there wasn't a realistic prospect of a conviction.

An Administrative Penalty will only be offered if the Council believes that there is sufficient evidence to prosecute in the criminal courts but prefer to offer the financial penalty as an alternative in lower value cases due to the cost of a full prosecution and taking into account any previous convictions for the claimant.

If the claimant rejects the offer of the penalty then the case will normally go to court. If they accept the penalty it is not an admission of guilt. They also have 28 days to cool off after signing the agreement but if they withdraw then it is likely that prosecution will result. After the 28 days the penalty can be recovered and an arrangement will normally be made. If it is not paid then the Council will go to County Court to recover the debt but can't pursue a prosecution in the criminal Court.

A penalty of this kind is not recorded by the Police and will not show up on any PNC check. It is retained by the Council and DWP and if a similar situation comes up in future a penalty is unlikely to be offered and proseuction is very likely.

There are two sets of Benefit fraud offences; those involving dishonesty and those where dishonesty doesn't have to be proven.

Essentially it is an offence to fail to promptly report a change in circumstances that you know affects your Benefit entitlement or to make a false statement for the purpose of obtaining Benefit. This can only be dealt with in the Magistrates Court and carries a maximum penalty of 3 month imprisonment although custody is very rare.

The other offences are much the same but includes the word "dishonety" and a such can be tried in the Crown Court and carries a maximum of seven years imprisonment.

gemini24

When claiming benefits it is of utmost importance to get receipts from the benefit department involved of all documents provided to prove entitlement. I work within this legal area and the words "I think I provided the info but can't prove it" and "I thought a few extra hours worked wouldn't make a difference" say it all.

Claimants seem to manage to do the right thing if their entitlement will be increased but forget to get proofs when their entitlement may lessen. I often wonder where "my proofs must have got lost in the post" are. Surely someone must have noticed where the pile of post the size of a large town is?

Surprisingly, claimants always receive letters advising their claim is cancelled or their landlord is evicting them due to non-payment because they haven't provided the required information in time, but they never seem to receive the interim letters.

redmel1621

SkyWatcher wrote: »

Sorry, I'm new to this forum but I can help to clarify in this case. I have stated the facts below for interest. I don't pull any punches because this is a very serious subject.

It sounds to me like the original poster has done the sensible thing - going to the interview (cases are more likely to go to Court if you don't turn up) and requesting written clarification are sensible steps as this is potentially a criminal matter. I would have also advised proper legal representation from a solicitor at the interview (not the CAB). I can't comment on whether the signing the penalty agreement was the right this to do. The Council were obviously satisfied that the change ahdn't been reported and were prepared to proceed to Court with the case. They couldn't offer the penalty if there wasn't a realistic prospect of a conviction.
The council implied I had not reported the changes as they have no paperwork to say that I had. In fact the council were undergoing major changes in the way they implemented new and existing claims, in terms of changing from a paper system to an electronic system......it is therefore not beyond the realms of possibility that they may have misplaced paperwork within this changeover period. I will also point out that they also had no record of the first tenancy agreement I submitted to them on the same day as my 'change in Tax Credit' details!!!!!

An Administrative Penalty will only be offered if the Council believes that there is sufficient evidence to prosecute in the criminal courts The only evidence they have is the fact that they have no piece of paper with my tax credit notice on it for that period...which they of course can't prove with any certainty wasn't provided by me and lost by them!! AND the fact (this is the one they keep telling me is my fault, and I am not really disputing it is an oversight on my part) that I did recieve numerous letters with my entitlement on it and failed to notify them it was incorrect.
but prefer to offer the financial penalty as an alternative in lower value cases due to the cost of a full prosecution and taking into account any previous convictions for the claimant.

If the claimant rejects the offer of the penalty then the case will normally go to court. If they accept the penalty it is not an admission of guilt. They also have 28 days to cool off after signing the agreement but if they withdraw then it is likely that prosecution will result. After the 28 days the penalty can be recovered and an arrangement will normally be made. If it is not paid then the Council will go to County Court to recover the debt but can't pursue a prosecution in the criminal Court.

A penalty of this kind is not recorded by the Police and will not show up on any PNC check. It is retained by the Council and DWP and if a similar situation comes up in future a penalty is unlikely to be offered and proseuction is very likely.

There are two sets of Benefit fraud offences; those involving dishonesty and those where dishonesty doesn't have to be proven.

Essentially it is an offence to fail to promptly report a change in circumstances that you know affects your Benefit entitlement or to make a false statement for the purpose of obtaining Benefit. I hope you are not implying that this applies to me....as I have stated in my previous posts, I DID NOTIFY THEM!!This can only be dealt with in the Magistrates Court and carries a maximum penalty of 3 month imprisonment although custody is very rare.

The other offences are much the same but includes the word "dishonety" and a such can be tried in the Crown Court and carries a maximum of seven years imprisonment.

I was hoping nobody else would comment on this thread, as I really wanted to think it is over and done with.....I have made my decision and wasn't really looking for anyone to agree or disagree with me. However I have now had two posts which (whether they meant to) have implied that I am in the wrong!!!!!

I have therefore replied to the relevant sections above.

Mel x

redmel1621

gemini24 wrote: »

When claiming benefits it is of utmost importance to get receipts from the benefit department involved of all documents provided to prove entitlement. I work within this legal area and the words "I think I provided the info but can't prove it" and "I thought a few extra hours worked wouldn't make a difference" say it all. I have not once said in any of my posts any of these statements, and would therefore appreciate not being tarred with a one size fits all mentality...I am an intelligent person and understand the rules of claiming benefits, I also do not 'THINK' I provided the information required, 'I KNOW' I did!! I am annoyed with myself that I am unable to find the receipts to prove it.

Claimants seem to manage to do the right thing if their entitlement will be increased but forget to get proofs when their entitlement may lessen. I also find this highly patronising....In fact the only reason this whole overpayment mess came to light, was not because I was 'caught out' but because I walked in the office and provided them with a stack of information that meant our claim would be changing to the effect of us receiving (potentially) no benefits at all!!! I often wonder where "my proofs must have got lost in the post" are. Surely someone must have noticed where the pile of post the size of a large town is?

Surprisingly, claimants always receive letters advising their claim is cancelled or their landlord is evicting them due to non-payment because they haven't provided the required information in time, but they never seem to receive the interim letters.

It is opinions like this that make me want to withdraw my agreement to pay the admin penalty, just to go to court and prove that I am in the right...or at least show up the fact that the council have nothing concrete that they can say I have done wrong.....except obviously my failure to thoroughly read and understand the calculations that they use to work out my benefit.

My main annoyance with regards to paying the penalty is the fact it has been put against an overpayment which is more their fault than mine. If they had put it against the fact that I had earnt more in wages over the, nearly, three years and had failed to notify them of my cost in living pay increases, I would have been able to swallow it a little better, as I fully hold my hand up to that oversight (it was never intentional) and accept that it was my fault.

Mel x

redmel1621

As an aside....Baby has not yet made an appearance, but I am not worried as I am in the middle of an assignment for University, so another few days would be fine by me:)

As far as this case goes, I am going to swallow the bitter taste that it has left and I really hope to receive no more comments or judgements on it. I only updated as I had been asked how it had turned out, which is nice to know people are interested:)

Many Thanks for any supportive posts and well wishes for the baby and me.

Mel x

SkyWatcher_3

redmel1621 wrote: »

I was hoping nobody else would comment on this thread, as I really wanted to think it is over and done with.....I have made my decision and wasn't really looking for anyone to agree or disagree with me. However I have now had two posts which (whether they meant to) have implied that I am in the wrong!!!!!

I have therefore replied to the relevant sections above.

Mel x

Mel,

I have added my thoughts as I know from this forum that there is a high chance that someone who finds themselves in a similar situation as you may search this forum looking for advice or others who may just be interested. It may also prompt someone who hadn't reported such a change to realise their mistake and do something about it to avoid the problems that you have had. For these reasons I have taken my time to set out in detail the facts surrounding the process.

I am not judging your situation, I actually made it clear that I can't comment on whether signing the agreement is the right thing to do. I can't say whether or not you were in the wrong as I am not in posession of the full facts and it is none of my business anyway.

I have set out the offences that may be committed in realtion to Benefit claims to show how serious a matter that these situations can potentially be. I haven't related these to your situation for the reasons already mentioned. I also made it clear that by signing the agreement you had not admitted any offence.

My point is that the offering of this type of penalty is not a decision taken lightly by the authority as if it is turned down the case has to be prepared for prosecution. If a not guilty plea is entered by the defendant then Council officers would have to give evidence and this all costs a significant amount of money, probably far in excess of the overpaid Benefit but this is the only way that both parties can make their representations to be judged by the Court.

BeenieCat

Hi Mel,

Just wanted to say i had an almost identical situation to yours last year and found the interview under caution very scary.

My case went to court but the judge said he wanted to adjourn as the council needed to rectify their own lack of communication with my case.

I was then offered an admin penalty too and added to my already existing repayment plan.

My case was all about me doing occasional overtime and i asked HB over the phone if i needed to put it in writing as well as giving them my payslips. I was told i just had to provide payslips, and the next thing i knew i was in court :rolleyes: