Under investigation for fraud!!!

sophie_maxwell

I'm so sorry to hear about this. They are completely useless :rolleyes:

How about going to a paper (local or national ), or is that not a good idea at this stage? It's amazing how quickly things become resolved when they get some press coverage and it helps if we're closer to an election too

Ross01

I work for a local authority and you do have an obligation to report all changes in circumstance no mater how small. However if a data match from the DWP showed such a small change we would have just updated the claim and informed you that you had been overpaid 23.11. We would then would recover £8.70 a week from your ongoing benefit until the overpayment was cleared. Our fraud team would only consider an interview under caution if they beleived it was deliberate, and not just such a minor oversight. Refuse the caution as I do not beleive they could sucessfully prosecute you in court, for such a small amount. If you accept the caution they get a thousand pound reward from the government for preventing fraud. Such a caution will remain on your DWP file without mentioning that its only for 30.00!!! And could cause you problems in future.

celticfc

Ross01 wrote:

I work for a local authority and you do have an obligation to report all changes in circumstance no mater how small. However if a data match from the DWP showed such a small change we would have just updated the claim and informed you that you had been overpaid 23.11. We would then would recover £8.70 a week from your ongoing benefit until the overpayment was cleared. Our fraud team would only consider an interview under caution if they beleived it was deliberate, and not just such a minor oversight. Refuse the caution as I do not beleive they could sucessfully prosecute you in court, for such a small amount. If you accept the caution they get a thousand pound reward from the government for preventing fraud. Such a caution will remain on your DWP file without mentioning that its only for 30.00!!! And could cause you problems in future.

Thanks very much Ross, that's really informative. I'm going into my local CAB office tomorrow with the intention of getting everything straightened out. I am not going to accept the caution, my mind was made up before I read your post.

I am guilty of misunderstanding how the benefits system works but not guilty of fraud. By accepting a caution I believe it will be as good as an admittance of guilt.

Hopefully by going to CAB I'll eventually get help in sorting out this mess that I'm in with the benefits system. I also have a question as to wether or not I was wrongly dismissed from work, I think I was but have sat back and done nothing because I'd be fighting ***a major company (name removed by boardguide)***.

Fran

celticfc,

I have removed the company name in case you are taking it further as from your location it would be easy to find which store you mean and might not help your case.

sophie_maxwell

£1000 "reward" for the benefits office? Now that may explain some of their behaviour... :rolleyes:

[Deleted User]

Ross01 wrote:

If you accept the caution they get a thousand pound reward from the government for preventing fraud. Such a caution will remain on your DWP file without mentioning that its only for 30.00!!! And could cause you problems in future.

No longer true, there is now no financial reward for issuing a caution. LAs do have to report how many cautions are issued and it sounds as if they are trying to pad their figures.

However an offer of a formal caution is only appropriate when certain criteria have been met. One of these is there must be a 'full and frank' admission of guilt by the claimant (which must be PACE compliant, usually at the tape recorded interview) including admitting knowing what they did was wrong and the reason they did is was to obtain benefit dishonestly. Admitting the 'offence' at the caution interview is not sufficient.

My advice would be to attend the interview and explain that you have done your research. Explain that you are going to make a formal complaint to The Benefit Fraud Inspectorate https://www.bfi.gov.uk and that you believe that they are trying to bully you into accepting a formal caution. Explain that you don't wish to turn down the caution 'on the day' but ask them to reconsider whether the offer of a caution is appropriate.

The mention of BFI will surpise them. If you truly believe you have done nothing wrong, fight your corner.

Out of interest which Local Authority are you dealing with ? They may well have a reputation for this sort of malpractice.

celticfc

charles_w wrote:

No longer true, there is now no financial reward for issuing a caution. LAs do have to report how many cautions are issued and it sounds as if they are trying to pad their figures.

However an offer of a formal caution is only appropriate when certain criteria have been met. One of these is there must be a 'full and frank' admission of guilt by the claimant (which must be PACE compliant, usually at the tape recorded interview) including admitting knowing what they did was wrong and the reason they did is was to obtain benefit dishonestly. Admitting the 'offence' at the caution interview is not sufficient.

My advice would be to attend the interview and explain that you have done your research. Explain that you are going to make a formal complaint to The Benefit Fraud Inspectorate https://www.bfi.gov.uk and that you believe that they are trying to bully you into accepting a formal caution. Explain that you don't wish to turn down the caution 'on the day' but ask them to reconsider whether the offer of a caution is appropriate.

The mention of BFI will surpise them. If you truly believe you have done nothing wrong, fight your corner.

Out of interest which Local Authority are you dealing with ? They may well have a reputation for this sort of malpractice.

I've been interviewed and admitted that I was wrong in failing to inform them as I assumed all depts would talk to one another. They then asked if it was my signature on the declaration on the claim form, I said it was they pointed out that I had to inform them of any changes as agreed in the signing of the declaration.

They then pointed out to me that the letter telling me I was awarded CTB also contained details of informing them if my circumstances changed. I told them I was so relieved after all the time spent waitng for a decision that I had not read after the first page notifying me of the award. After the tape was turned off the one woman there told me it was easy to get confused about the workings of the system and that she had been on benefits twice before so she understood where I was coming from. They accepted that I was naive. I was led to believe that no action would be taken because of the confusion on my part.

The office in question is Newport.

BTW, thanks for the edit Fran.

[Deleted User]

Stick to your guns. You haven't made a full and frank admission to justify a caution. The prospects of the case going to prosecution for the amount of money involved are negligible.

It's important that when you speak to them again that you convey that you have done your research and are well informed.

If you agree to a caution you are admitting to an offence of dishonesty. Ask yourself 'Did I act dishonestly and am I prepared to have a formal record of this?'

You mention Newport, is that the DWP office or the Local Authority that interviewed you ?

celticfc

charles_w wrote:

Stick to your guns. You haven't made a full and frank admission to justify a caution. The prospects of the case going to prosecution for the amount of money involved are negligible.

It's important that when you speak to them again that you convey that you have done your research and are well informed.

If you agree to a caution you are admitting to an offence of dishonesty. Ask yourself 'Did I act dishonestly and am I prepared to have a formal record of this?'

You mention Newport, is that the DWP office or the Local Authority that interviewed you ?

It was Newport City Council who interviewed me. I was really surprised and shocked to learn that it was an interview under caution as though I were a criminal and acting in such a way to defraud them.

On my part this has all been a huge mistake in not informing them of the change in circumstance. I have never even considered defrauding the system, I would'nt know how! This is all because of my inexperience with the benefits and how they work.

They are so efficiant in taking me to task for making a mistake but I am still waiting on a decision for IS which I claimed November last year. If when I was working I was as incompetent as they seem to be in their work I would have been sacked on the spot.

[Deleted User]

celticfc wrote:

It was Newport City Council who interviewed me.

Interesting. Newport City Council were chosen for an inspection by BFI because they had a low level of sanctions (Prosecutions, administrative penalties and FORMAL CAUTIONS)

This may be of use to you

http://www.bfi.gov.uk/reports/2006/bfi/newport/

I would guess they are going all out to 'improve' their figures. However they are going about it in the wrong way. It makes my suggestion of mentioning BFI all the more relevant. They will be mighty surprised you have taken the trouble to find out about their inspection and read the report.