Carers Allowance

XCN

Hi I have been overpaid carers allowance as I wrote to inform them that my hours had increased and actually it was not dependent on my hours but rather my income therfore I have been overpaid for a potential 3 years.

I realise this is going to quate to a lot of money and am worried about my ability to repay although if I should not have received this money then obviously I need to pay it back.

Does anyone have experience of repaying benefits and what happens?, timescales, interest rates et?

rogerblack

Firstly - contact them ASAP - they may prosecute if the sum is over 2K, and you want to avoid that if possible.
Secondly - how much over 100/week (or whatever the appropriate limit was).

It's not raw 100 income - there are some disregards - which will mean that you can earn in some cases more than 100/week - deductions from your wages that are allowed are tax, some NI contributions, and expenses 'wholely and unavoidably' incurred at work.

In addition, if in any week, your income fell below the threshold, on that week you were entitled.

As to the payback period - prepare a listing of your fixed outgoings, and state how much you can pay back per week.

Elvisia

Talk to the CAB, they have experience of this sort of thing and can ring up on your behalf. You may receive a letter that says you owe xxx amount and it has to be paid back, but in fact I think they can only take so much per week out of your benefits, again CAB would know. The CAB can argue your case; if it would put you in financial dire straits then they can't demand you pay back wads of cash. Hope it works out.

rogerblack

Elvisia wrote: »

Talk to the CAB, they have experience of this sort of thing and can ring up on your behalf. You may receive a letter that says you owe xxx amount and it has to be paid back, but in fact I think they can only take so much per week out of your benefits, again CAB would know. The CAB can argue your case; if it would put you in financial dire straits then they can't demand you pay back wads of cash. Hope it works out.

This is absolutely not the case, if prosecution happens.
Around 9000 pounds of overpaid benefits may lead to a further 'proceeds of crime act' prosecution, where they can demand the sale of assets, including - for example - your house.

creditcardhelp11

rogerblack wrote: »

This is absolutely not the case, if prosecution happens.
Around 9000 pounds of overpaid benefits may lead to a further 'proceeds of crime act' prosecution, where they can demand the sale of assets, including - for example - your house.

A complete over reaction and load of rubbish tbh. Theft and fraud requires dishonesty I cannot see any. The claimant reported a change just the wrong one and did not dishonestly get the money. Although ignorance is no defence so you'll have to pay it back. Pop into your cab ASAP they'll help you out. Make sure it's reported to dwp ASAP. Try not to worry too much as that wont't help. Take your wage slips to cab too. What was your exact weekly/monthly NET (after tax) pay.

rogerblack

creditcardhelp11 wrote: »

A complete over reaction and load of rubbish tbh. Theft and fraud requires dishonesty I cannot see any. The claimant reported a change just the wrong one and did not dishonestly get the money.

No, it doesn't.
It requires the claimant to be found to have fraudulently claimed.


Reporting the wrong change knowingly is as bad as not reporting it at all. The issue is twofold - if the DWP should have known from the letter that there was an overpayment - in which case the overpayment is not recoverable - or if it is determined to be a fraudulent declaration, rather than one done in error.

I point to a thread http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/241/ - which outlines a case where someone did not report a change of someone moving in, and was subsequently found to have committed fraud in the magistrates court, and then a proceeds of crime act prosecution occurred, and was successful.

The only problem is that in the interim period, the tribunal to which they appealed confirmed that there was no overpayment at all, as there was no change of circumstances.

In this case, where there is not even that defence, the case would be much more straightforward, it's just a case of if the prosecution would be brought.

Is this certain - or even likely to happen - possibly not - though 2000 is over the prosecution threshold of the DWP.
This is why it's very important to check the actual entitlement for every week in the period, to reduce any possible overpayment to the minimum.

creditcardhelp11

Please cite which fraud crime does not require an element of dishonesty?

creditcardhelp11

Hiding the fact that someone moved in (dishonest) and reporting a change incorrectly with no dishonesty are two very different things.

rogerblack

creditcardhelp11 wrote: »

Hiding the fact that someone moved in (dishonest) and reporting a change incorrectly with no dishonesty are two very different things.

I was unclear - to clarify - the above case I mentioned - nobody had actually moved in.
They diddn't report someone had moved in, because nobody had.
They appealed this decision, and were initially turned down.
During this time, a criminal prosecution for benefit fraud occurred, leading to a proceeds of crime act prosecution.

However, the later appeal to the upper tribunal decided there was no overpayment, as nobody had moved in.
The POCA sentencing decided to ignore this.

This is more complicated than the original posters case, where there is no argument they did not report a change.
To be convicted of benefit fraud, you do not need to have committed fraud. You need to be found to have committed fraud.
This is not always the same thing.

creditcardhelp11

rogerblack wrote: »

I was unclear - to clarify - the above case I mentioned - nobody had actually moved in.
They diddn't report someone had moved in, because nobody had.
They appealed this decision, and were initially turned down.
During this time, a criminal prosecution for benefit fraud occurred, leading to a proceeds of crime act prosecution.

However, the later appeal to the upper tribunal decided there was no overpayment, as nobody had moved in.
The POCA sentencing decided to ignore this.

This is more complicated than the original posters case, where there is no argument they did not report a change.
To be convicted of benefit fraud, you do not need to have committed fraud. You need to be found to have committed fraud.
This is not always the same thing.

Yes, I understand what you are getting at. However, unless the OP is fabricating the story there is no dishonesty. This will be more evident when the OP reports the overpayment to the DWP.