I have recived a letter asking me to come in and do a interview under caution

Paparika

OP

first thing i did when i had to stop work and move to benefits is to make sure everyone knew i had fibro fog (fellow fibro sufferer) explained what it is, what it means in my life and that i can be very forgetful, and every phone conversation needs to be followed up by a letter or email for my records.

Please don't stress, if you really truly believe you haven't done wrong, then just try to forget about it until the meeting, your gonna make yourself ill, you know that.There is nothing you can do or find out until then.

Fran

OP,

Are you paying the solicitor? It's just that you can get free advice from Citizens Advice or Community Legal Advice. One of these or other benefits advisors in your area would be better than a non-specialist solicitor in any case as they deal with benefits all the time.

viktory

newbie1980 wrote: »

hi sorry to hear of your pred
alli could suggeat is tell what uve just said and u will have nothing to fear
its the REAL SCUM who they should be chasing
hope u get on ok
newbie1980

I love this sort of post - why not define REAL SCUM. Besides, you don't know the OP from Adam; with all respect to them, they could be illegally milking the system for all they are worth and are now scared and seeking support because they have been caught.

OP, if you have done nothing wrong then you have nothing to worry about. Be calm and be totally honest.

sharski

NASA wrote: »

Needs new 'legal' people methinks because there are a few loopholes that need to be closed. I believe the rules are being tightened for the next phase so that a repeat is not on the cards.

Yup, NASA... you are very correct!!

Looks like it's back to ESA, although they still need to dot the 'i's, etc..!

Confused?? You will be!!

wearside_2

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but as long as you tell them that your ex stays over (not in your bed) for 3 nights a week or fewer, and he has his own address, etc, then there is absolutely nothing they can do. If he stayed over more than that, they would probably feel that you are living together.

I am sorry to inform everyone but there is no such thing as the Three Night Rule! Each case is treated individually on its merits.

SuziQ

wearside wrote: »

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but as long as you tell them that your ex stays over (not in your bed) for 3 nights a week or fewer, and he has his own address, etc, then there is absolutely nothing they can do. If he stayed over more than that, they would probably feel that you are living together.

I am sorry to inform everyone but there is no such thing as the Three Night Rule! Each case is treated individually on its merits.

I was about to post something like this. This is a myth that is regularly trotted out on this board and I would hate anyone to take this as gospel and get into trouble as a resuly. They look at the relationship as a whole, any financial involvement etc,whether there is a relationship in the couple form-for example someone with a partner in the forces may not pive at hom for months on end but are still a couple. There have been posters on here who have been done for fraud where the person staying has stayed less than 3 nights a week but they are clearly in a relationship. I don't think the OP has anything to worry about at all however .

jctski

Shelldean wrote: »

Is your ex the father of either or both of your children???

I only ask cos thats what stuffed us up..... I had one DD by my 1st husband then I had twins and a DS by partner. After DS was born we'd split, however I was really struggling with 4 kids under 6 ( yes stupid i know but not what I planned) Ex popped in from time to time but i was sole carer for this period.
I was also suffering severe PND, youngest was about 6mths and I'd already been given a childminder for 3 hrs a wks for the twins ( had also suffered PND after their birth)
To get the youngest under same childminder I had to have a visit from Social services. So round she came and was totally scathing and left bascially telling me I was a danger to my children. granted I wasn't great but I was no where near a danger to any of my children. I was also told they'd be placed on at risk register, remember this was supposed to be avisit to see if I could get 3 hrs of childminding. This really was the straw that broke the camels back, i totally rboke down and called ex at work crying and wailing he coudln't understand what the problem was couldnt even understand me. So came round staright away. He dealt with the kids, ran me a abth put me to bed and then he stayed, he stayed for about a month in total, just giving me a chance to get back on my feet and sort myself out. Being in such a state never gave a thought to my benefits:eek: Till a knock on front door and there she was the lady from the fraud team. Some kind soul had thought that cos I wasnt in a fit state to tell them EX was staying they would!!!! He had none of his stuff at mine bar a few clothes and he was sleeping on a matteress in the babys room. I offered to show her this but to no avail. As we was both parent of child in the house and we shared things like shopping, cooking washing etc Then we MUST be a couple. nothing I could do or say would sway her. EX couldnt prove he was living elsewhere as he was kipping on his parents sofa. Lady said of course his parents would say he lived there!!!!

Benefits stopped straightaway as did HB and CT.

As it happen we had the last laugh on the sneak who shopped us, over 11 yrs later we're still together and are now married. It was just the shove we needed to sort our relatinship out,

Guess there is some happy endings then :-)

jctski

SuziQ wrote: »

wearside wrote: »

I was about to post something like this. This is a myth that is regularly trotted out on this board and I would hate anyone to take this as gospel and get into trouble as a resuly. They look at the relationship as a whole, any financial involvement etc,whether there is a relationship in the couple form-for example someone with a partner in the forces may not pive at hom for months on end but are still a couple. There have been posters on here who have been done for fraud where the person staying has stayed less than 3 nights a week but they are clearly in a relationship. I don't think the OP has anything to worry about at all however .

I understand the part ie your partner could be a soldier, long distance HGV driver etc.... But I am learning this 'living together' is such a gray area, nothing is written down in concrete so it seems, I mean, ok, take me, my ex helps me allot, he has stayed over, he could be seen from a neighbours point of view as my partner, totally understandable when you are looking it from outside, as for finances, what if you do some ebay shopping together, i have learnt this could be seen as having a relationship as living together, which to me is ridculous, so what they are saying is, if you shop together, which you would do with a mate, mum,dad, brother sister, aunt etc, which is normal social interaction with fellow human beings, ie lend someones credit card to purchuse online because you dont own one, and in this day and age you seem to have to have one to buy online, this is seen as having a relationship as living together?, this really needs to be looked into by the gov, this is too wishy washy rules, and because of it, peopel are being dragged into interviews under caution and the life scared out of them, in case they did something wrong like forgot to change a utility bill in persons name or dared allowed someone to stay over is to me against a person human rights of privacy, surely we dont sign our soul away when we sign on that dotted line when we claim a benefit?

bitsandpieces

jctski wrote: »

Thank you, I will say what I have wrote, just that having fibro, makes you have a foogy memory, its to do with sleep disturbances I have, and I am worried I wont say the true things at the right moments when questions are asked, and I will make things worse for myself, x

If this is classed as a disability and will cause problems in interview, you're quite entitled to ask them to make reasonable adjustments. E.g. if you take things in better in writing, you might suggest questions in writing in advance.

jctski

sharski wrote: »

This rule regarding DLA is only recent (August 09) - prior to that, JC guidance was to swap LP onto ESA.
DWP did not, it seems, consult the right 'legal' people & from August 09, any LP whose IS will be coming to an end due to the age of the youngest child & who says they are too ill to go on JSA, will remain on IS & claim IB credits instead.
You can actually appeal & ask for this to happen - DWP are expecting a small number of LP to appeal once word gets out!!!

Hope this helps!

Hi again
I cannot find anything on this, can you tell me where did you found out this from, because I am planning of writing to IS about this and why I have been put onto ESA when I could of just styaed to IS- with IB , thanks allot x