Advice please re- fraud interview!!

sunshaeen

Hi all i really need some advice. I have received a letter asking me to attend an interview under caution with regards to a claim for income support (which has now ended) and my partners employment. My partner is currently not working so im not sure what this could be about, he had some temp work in feb for a few days- i have a copy of a letter which i sent to dwp declaring this and a reply from them saying my claim would not be affected. Also the income was declared on our child tax credit renewal. A few days later i received a form from the fraud dept asking me to confirm the amount which i did. Then on fri received this letter. I feel sick with worry- i have read previous post on here from people who have been through this interview but it still does not put my mind at rest. Im due to start a new part time job next month and im petrified of getting a criminal record! My interview is next fri im considering getting an earlier one so i can see what the problem is as i cant bear the worry! Thanks for replies. x

dmg24

For what reason were you on IS?

paulofessex

I'm sure they send them out so people get them at the weekend have to stew and frett over the weekend before being able to contact them.

sunshaeen

hi dmg- i was pregnant and unable to look for work therfore could not make a claim for jsa either alone or as a joint claim for my partner- contacted jobcentre helpline who advised to go on IS for that period

sunshaeen

paulofessex wrote: »

I'm sure they send them out so people get them at the weekend have to stew and frett over the weekend before being able to contact them.

Yeah i know ive never ever been in trouble so this is alien to me! We have both always worked so dont have a full enough understanding of the benefit system to cheat it- just followed advice we were given by jobcentre plus and DWP! Surely they will see that since i volunteered the information i wasnt trying to hide anything or cheat them

dmg24

What are you claiming now?

sunshaeen

dmg24 wrote: »

What are you claiming now?

Currently claiming JSA

sunshaeen

have rung dept this morning and they have put my mind at rest that its just to let me explain my end of the story so feel better now!

roger196

sunshaeen wrote: »

have rung dept this morning and they have put my mind at rest that its just to let me explain my end of the story so feel better now!

Would be very wary of this. The original letter referred to interview under caution and this has not been amended in writing. If you decide to go ahead, my advice is to say all questions should be put to you in writing and will be replied to in writing after you have received appropriate legal advice. If you feel you have to answer verbally, I would preface every answer with "this verbal response is given without adequate time for consideration and without legal advice, may be changed later and may not be relied on in court"
You really need the support of a solicitor who specialises in benefit fraud.

real1314

roger196 wrote: »

Would be very wary of this. The original letter referred to interview under caution and this has not been amended in writing. If you decide to go ahead, my advice is to say all questions should be put to you in writing and will be replied to in writing after you have received appropriate legal advice. If you feel you have to answer verbally, I would preface every answer with "this verbal response is given without adequate time for consideration and without legal advice, may be changed later and may not be relied on in court"
You really need the support of a solicitor who specialises in benefit fraud.

LOL

Now that is weird advice. "may be changed later" - what on earth would you be intending "Yes I did" becomes "No I didn't" ??
Are you legally qualified to give this sort of advice or are you just spinning it up from your own experience?

roger196

real1314 wrote: »

LOL

Now that is weird advice. "may be changed later" - what on earth would you be intending "Yes I did" becomes "No I didn't" ??
Are you legally qualified to give this sort of advice or are you just spinning it up from your own experience?

If the investigating authorities had sufficient evidence to mount a prosecution they do not need to interview the claimant. They only need to interview when they need the claimant to provide the evidence which will convict him/herself. Remember the onus of proof is on the prosecution.
The need for interview will be dressed up as "the opportunity to present their side of the story".
As I said before, OP needs the support of a solicitor who specialises in benefit fraud.