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

mandycr

just to try put your mind at rest, as someone said earlier that u may or may not be telling us the whole truth, i had an under caution interview a few years ago after i split from my partner someone thought they should notify the dwp that we were still living together, although we werent he stayed on a saturday night to look after our son while i had a break and went out, the dwp had to asess wether we were a couple as a result of one night a week, if u do have anything to hide (not that i am saying you do) then they have to give you the chance to own up (under caution),your benefits will be stopped but hey no criminal charges. and they will tell u that if you are telling fibs and cheating then someone will be watching your property and u could face charges.
if however u have nothing to hide then tell them that go in to that interview with your head held high, keep positive.
just to add that as a result of our misfortune my partner and i got married and are still together so not all stories are bad ones

pupsicola

From what you wrote you have nothing to worry about. Go in and tell them how it is. Nothing you state about your life and what you have been doing seems to point towards any fraud.

Their letters can come across as very aggressive and over the top sometimes. I think they use a bog standard letter for all and they do make errors.

Hope it sorts itself out

foximus.prime

Hi, the 3 night rule changed (either earlier this year or last year). You can have someone over to stay 2 nights a week. I've a friend who works for DWP, so we were speaking about it as we both have a child and claim child tax credits. I assume the rule is no different for the various benefits but I can't swear to that! Following a break-up I also had to attend an interview under caution (my name was still on his bank account so they thought I had access to the money. As the card with my name on, which I never knew he'd received!, has never been used, this was cleared up). Please don't worry, during my interview the man told me I should inform the benefits people because my mum would sometimes buy me some bits of food whilst doing my own shopping! So I contacted them, and felt like a right muppet as I could hear the other person trying not to laugh about the fact that the guy who interviewed me was so bothered about something so trivial!

All the best.

Macro_3

foximus.prime wrote: »

Hi, the 3 night rule changed (either earlier this year or last year). You can have someone over to stay 2 nights a week. I've a friend who works for DWP, so we were speaking about it as we both have a child and claim child tax credits. I assume the rule is no different for the various benefits but I can't swear to that! Following a break-up I also had to attend an interview under caution (my name was still on his bank account so they thought I had access to the money. As the card with my name on, which I never knew he'd received!, has never been used, this was cleared up). Please don't worry, during my interview the man told me I should inform the benefits people because my mum would sometimes buy me some bits of food whilst doing my own shopping! So I contacted them, and felt like a right muppet as I could hear the other person trying not to laugh about the fact that the guy who interviewed me was so bothered about something so trivial!

All the best.

Just as there is no three night rule, there is no two night rule. And to pre-empt all of the other possibilities, there are no 1,4,5,6,7 or 0 night rules. It simply doesn't work like that.

dippy3103

Macro beat me to it. Each case it's judged on it's merits, there are no hard and fast rules.
An IUC is just to estabalish the facts- in some cases the person has committed fraud, in others there is an explanation which shows they havn't.

NASA_2

jctski wrote: »

Well all i can say, that when I went onto esa, I thought too that I will still get the premuim, but was told no, so I dont know whats going on with me anymore :-(

What was happening was that any IS Lone Parents who were moved to ESA due to Lone Parent Obligations were being put straight onto the WRA component of ESA which is £89.80.

In order to qualify the Disability Premium had to be being paid and that the claimant didnt move off IS early or claim ESA too early.

mazzybaby33

sorry to hear about your trouble Do you know you do not have to attend an IUC? If you have done nothing wrong I would not attend

DX2

mazzybaby33 wrote: »

sorry to hear about your trouble Do you know you do not have to attend an IUC? If you have done nothing wrong I would not attend

Really?! do you have a link to this fact. I suspect burying your head in the sand isn't going to help.

If you don't attend an IUC I suspect your benefits may well be reduced or even stopped.

mazzybaby33

You do not have to attend an interview under caution It is up to the DWP/Council to prove you have done something wrong only then can they withdraw your benefit

go to wwwdotsouthsomerset.gov.uk/media/pdf/3/5/interview under caution web version 08.pdf

sorry I am not allowed to post links replace the dot with a . you will find the page I googled it

Not suggesting you bury your head in the sand Just pointing out the facts

DX2

mazzybaby33 wrote: »

You do not have to attend an interview under caution It is up to the DWP/Council to prove you have done something wrong only then can they withdraw your benefit

go to wwwdotsouthsomerset.gov.uk/media/pdf/3/5/interview under caution web version 08.pdf

sorry I am not allowed to post links replace the dot with a . you will find the page I googled it

Not suggesting you bury your head in the sand Just pointing out the facts

Thankyou for the link I forgot as a new poster you are unable to post the actual link. http://www.communitylegaladvice.org.uk/media/F1D/4B/IUC_2009_accessible_FINAL.pdf

A few things that spring up from your link though.

You don’t have to go to the interview. But you should think about whether you would be better off going, or trying to sort it out another way. Every situation is different and there are different views on what is the best thing to do.

On the other hand, the DWP and the council say that it’s in your best interests to attend. It gives you a chance to find out what they think happened and to explain your side of the story. If the fraud section feels that it has enough evidence it may just take you to court anyway, without an interview, and you will have missed out on an opportunity to stop things going further.

During the fraud investigation

The DWP or council shouldn’t stop your benefit just because they are investigating you for fraud. However, they have to make sure that they don’t pay you what they believe you are not entitled to. This means that if they have strong evidence that you are being overpaid then they can reduce or suspend your benefit so as to stop paying you too much while they check it out.
Often the benefit section ‘suspend’ your benefit when they ask the fraud section to get involved. Suspending your benefit is different from stopping it: although you still don’t get any money, it means that the claim is still there so you won’t have to reclaim it when the problem is sorted out, if you are still entitled.