Criminal Compliance Interview Under Caution

bdt1

Hello,

Less than 2 weeks to go to Tribunal Hearing , NACSA ask after Criminal Compliance 'investigation' - I use that term loosely, as don't think they could catch cold never mind hard evidence!!!!!!!!!!! Was I asked to attend an 'interview under caution'. The answer is no - NACSA state that is probably as CSA knew their 'alleged evidence was shaky to say the least'

In nutshell PWC lost a Tribunal on basis of 'lifestyle inconsistent with declared earnings' - I'm part-tiem self-employed. So after this 'loss' Criminal Compliance got involved looked at bank statements, took all credits in accounts as my assessable income and came to an CM figure, back-dated it 4 years, said I owed 34k arrears, got LO, CCJ and interim charge.

But, as I have proven 3 times now, (ICO agree CSA 'lost or mistakenly destroyed my evidence on 3 occasions to prove my innocence), eventually Tribunal hearing imminent. But, NACSA tell me and again, just shows how corrupt CSA are - was I ever interviewed under caution following Criminal Compliance - NO! They asked if they could visit my home, 2 Will Smith guys (Men In Black) turned up, my wife and I were present, they were armed with our bank statement and went through credits into accounts, my wife explained away that somem of the ones consistently 3 or 4 days after her wage were company expense reimbursement 1 month in arrears - they stated 'that explains those'. But then went on to enforce a massive error - in short all credits in account except my wife's earnings were taken as my assessable income, assessed as such and then back-dated creating massive arrears.

NACSA say we have a strong case, and fact that no 'interview undr caution' reinforces our case, they had made a massive error to beigin with - just cannot believev this corrupt agency puts peoples lives/homes at risk - and to add I do pay regular CM, just not at the rate the corrupt Criminal Compliance stipulate as they state I earn a total of our entire household minus my wife's earnings - just crazy

bdt1

Sorry, but to add (again) CSA assessment state there are no children in my household (there are 4), I do not have a partner (I've been married happily for 12 years), my mortgage payments are £69 per week (they are £762 per month), assessable income has been proven to include child benefit for 4 children in household, CSA monies to my wife for my 2 stepchildren, my wifes reimbursement of company expenses 1 month in arrears, a insurance surrender inmy wife's name only, plus all my business credits as profitable income (if only), I lay flooring for a living - has CSA noticed there's a recession??? Never mind discard my business accounts, receipts, and tax returns showings my day-to-day running costs - van hire is now £320 per month??????


They are deluded, incompetent and inefficient, but that only make sthem more dangerous in our experience, just hope we get sorted or we will lose our home - and of course PWC will benefit, she's lived on benefits, fraudulently sc****d system, still is, claiming things not entitled to - in process of proof at moment, but hey, hope the children who I have been 'not allowed' to visit for 14 years have more of my genetic make-up than hers. Should have known years ago, she was a bad egg, we got a house together, she worked in wages Dept of local cash & carry, told me her mother was supplying furniture etc, nextthing I knew, girl she woked with was arrested, cut long story short it was my ex, she thieved thousands, still doing it now, but to me and the benefit system

dizzydusty

If it was an interview under caution, they would have to have issued a caution advising you of your rights to remain silent, have legal representation present or a witness. They must also clarify that you understand the caution and can give an explination of what it means - in your own terms. They would also have to have either taped the interview or have contemporanious?? notes of the interview and everything that was shown to you and your responses. If they didn't issue a caution, then it is not an interview under caution - Not according to PACE anyway.

I would have expected them to get you to sign some sort of witness statement documenting what your answers were to the documents you were shown or questions you were asked.

CSA must comply with the Data Protection Act when requesting information even if it is a request under section 29 of the act (detection or prevention of a crime). It is illegal for them to go fishing (for want of a better term) for random information held on you. I would imagine that you would have a right to complain against individuals within the CSA and request an investigation into the handling of your case if it comes to light that the CSA did not act on or chose to ignore information they received - especially if they requested it under DPA - this would be bank statements, credit records, other government department records such as child benefit, council tax, tax credit etc.

I deal with the CSA as a PWC, and have had nothing but issues with them, however you have my full sympathy as I cannot believe problems you have encountered. This needs to be sorted and staff who have not done their job properly need to be held accountable for their actions. While I don't know if you are able to take legal action against the CSA if the tribunal find in your favour you should certainly be able to put a complaint in against staff who have worked on your case and deliberately or otherwise contributed to the mass of issues that have occurred. It is not a case of oops we made a mistake, sorry!

Best of luck mate!

bdt1

Thanks Dizzy - well, no we were never issued with a caution advising of our legal rights, we never had any interview taped, so an interview under caution has never occured.

As said before 2 guys asked if they could ask few questions so came to our home, but suppose as answers I gave were not 'what they wanted to hear' they chose not to act on my evidence. When Tribunal complete I will be putting whole complaint in, for the specific staff who have 'chosen to ignore' my evidence or even for the staff who has 'lost or mistakenly destroyed my evidence' - ie nearly 100 pages of bank statements!!!

As NACSA said, suppose reason there was never an interview under caution was because underneath it all they know they are wrong, they have put my house at risk due to enforcement of this proveable incorrect assessment and alleged arrears. My marriage is on a knife edge and I have had to explain to my children why it is a good idea to keep all doors locked - eg the bailiff, whaich innocent parent should ever have to have that discussion??????????????

I'm disgusted and appaulled by them, will be taking this much further after Tribunal

Again thanks