worried to death!!!!

AnxiousMum

hunterforce wrote: »

doesn't co mean community order, where does it mention being held in custody for 26 weeks, surely they wouldn't do this on first offence when we have 3 young children and still a relitive to be looked after, where would the care come from then??

The person I know who got done for fraud......got a one year custodial sentence, served four months and out with a tag for two months. She was looking after a father with cancer, a special needs teenage son, and a daughter who was aged 6. Her husband had to pull it all together for the time she was inside.

Can your wife access her file in any way to see exactly what figures were given and when? If an investigation has started then it may be too late for her to do this? Definitely get legal advice on this - too big a risk at hand for you not to.

hunterforce

AnxiousMum wrote: »

The person I know who got done for fraud......got a one year custodial sentence, served four months and out with a tag for two months. She was looking after a father with cancer, a special needs teenage son, and a daughter who was aged 6. Her husband had to pull it all together for the time she was inside.

for the same sort of thing??

AnxiousMum

skcollobcat10 wrote: »

I do not think that this will happen to the OP wife because she would be a first offender. They will hopefully just give her a slap on the wrist.

This was a first time offender too (well, I doubt she would've told me if she had been done before, but according to the newspaper article, it was a first time) - but it was over a number of years of 'forgetting' to tell them a change.

hunterforce

skcollobcat10 wrote: »

I do not think that this will happen to the OP wife because she would be a first offender. They will hopefully just give her a slap on the wrist.

Im Feeling sick to the bone here!!!! :(

AnxiousMum

hunterforce wrote: »

for the same sort of thing??

for benefit fraud, yes. I know from what you are saying, you don't believe your wife has committed fraud.....it's been an oversight, but if there was a charge laid, it would be fraud.

If she's being investigated 'criminally', then she has the right to legal counsel. You don't have to take the 'duty counsel' offered, she can get any criminal lawyer who will agree to take on her case. They would be present during any interview under caution, but more importantly can seek out other areas of law where similar arguments have been won. Seek legal advice......for the small amount of overpayment - they are looking at recovering all payments during the time......I think if she was going to deliberately commit fraud, she would've gone for something with alot more financial gain, not just forgotten to tell them about £38 per month which would not have made a huge difference to her financially overall, had the proper deductions been made at the time. Get the legal advice you need from the right person.......all it takes is a judge whose argued with his wife that morning, and your wife could pay the price.

I'm totally against benefit fraud and believe all intentional fraudsters should be taken to the cleaners.......but this doesn't sound intentional at all.

Arcey80

Does the government charge interest on the money owed each year? If we take £203 a month for 5 years exactly then that is £12180 received in total over that period, yet you owe over £11000 of that. In fact, it suggests that the £100 a week threshold was actually broken within the first year?

From what you say, basing on the increase in her wages to £126 a week, then she must have been borderline just under the £100 a week a limit anyway. In which case, any kind of payrise should have set alarm bells ringing in the first place!

FOURCANDLES_2

dmg24 wrote: »

An MP is not there to provide *hugs*!



This is why you need to seek professional advice - as AnA2 has mentioned, lots of factors are taken into account. Also, it is not a given that she would even be found guilty.

Do not presume for your MP and do not tell your MP what his job is and who he should and should not assist , I would also suggest she could also actually show him all of the paper work something you HAVE NOT SEEN but seem happy to give your advise on.

AsknAnswer2

hunterforce wrote: »

doesn't co mean community order, where does it mention being held in custody for 26 weeks, surely they wouldn't do this on first offence when we have 3 young children and still a relitive to be looked after, where would the care come from then??

CO is community order, however the sentencing guidelines state Community order or maximum of 26 weeks in custody". I have the PDF file of the sentencing guidelines on my PC (the official document, not a copy n paste from a website) - it mentions it there. I'd post it up here but I can't see an attachment option.

Yes, they can impose prison for a first offence. They will take into account that it's a first offence, that there are children and the fact that someone needs care as mitigating circumstances. But they also have to take into account aggravating circumstances, which include the nature of the fraud, period of time the fraud was committed, and the sum of money fraudulently obtained. All factors are weighed by the court to decide on the sentence.