Interview Under Caution Re Alleged Benefit Fraud..

Dunroamin

uponahill wrote: »

Try asking for a qualified and experienced solicitor that specialises in benefit law - you will be looked at as though you have two heads! And told to accept what you are given!!

You have a lot to learn about the criminal justice system!! It only works for those with the right connections, money and standing in the community.

In many countries you wouldn't get any free representation - be grateful!

OP do you have any legal cover as part of your home insurance policy?

[Deleted User]

OP they are not in the least bit interested in any current debt that you have

Yorkie1

OP - if the worst came to the worst and you were prosecuted: re the sentencing powers, anything under £35K will be dealt with at the magistrates' court, which is the lowest criminal court.

The sentencing guidelines are at pages 25-26 here.

It's likely to be deemed 'multiple fraud' where one false declaration or a failure to disclose a change in circumstances results in multiple payments.

If the benefit amounts involved are less than £5K, as another poster seems to think, then you are probably looking at a sentencing range which is likely to fall in the community penalty sentence rather than custody, particularly if you plead guilty early on.

This is not a guarantee of what will happen in the worst case scenario, but hopefully it will provide some reassurance at this stage.

uponahill

vax2002 wrote: »

Why would they need a warrant to arrest someone they have already arrested ? DOH

Anyway, you are doing a good job of scaring the OP to death, keep it up, it might work.

Sorry my mistake - too many arrests!!! It was amended 2 mins after your post.

I'm not trying to scare anyone. I'm just telling how it is and correcting your previous comment.

Police do get involved in many benefit fraud cases - even simple and smallish ones where the claimant refuses to co-operate and attend an interview under caution. It is the only way that the claimant can be made to attend and be questioned!!

uponahill

Dunroamin wrote: »

Why would anyone who knows they've done nothing wrong have to worry about it?

I always state 'no comment' every time I have been interviewed by the police. It is their job to find the evidence, not mine to give it.

Oh and by the way, I have yet to meet an ex con that says that they were ever guilty - prisons are full of innocent people - didn't you know that?

uponahill

Dunroamin wrote: »

But again, if you're telling the truth and have nothing to hide why would you have to do this?

I just hope you are never put in the situation whether your feel you are innocent or know you are innocent - you always end up thinking you may not be as innocent as you think you are!

uponahill

Dunroamin wrote: »

In many countries you wouldn't get any free representation - be grateful!

OP do you have any legal cover as part of your home insurance policy?

Oh please get real and stick to the point. We are not talking about living in a 3rd world country.

Personally I have not yet found any duty solicitor that is fit for purpose. I have always refused legal assistance and answered every question with a 'no comment'.

uponahill

Yorkie1 wrote: »

OP - if the worst came to the worst and you were prosecuted: re the sentencing powers, anything under £35K will be dealt with at the magistrates' court, which is the lowest criminal court.

The sentencing guidelines are at pages 25-26 here.

It's likely to be deemed 'multiple fraud' where one false declaration or a failure to disclose a change in circumstances results in multiple payments.

If the benefit amounts involved are less than £5K, as another poster seems to think, then you are probably looking at a sentencing range which is likely to fall in the community penalty sentence rather than custody, particularly if you plead guilty early on.

This is not a guarantee of what will happen in the worst case scenario, but hopefully it will provide some reassurance at this stage.

Wow things have certainly changed. Back in the 80's ANY benefit type fraud over £1000 was always passed up to Crown for sentencing.

Late 80's saw a prison sentence for a first timer of around 6 months + another 6/12 months of suspended/probation, for a fraud in excess of £10,000.

They are going soft now!!

teddyboy02

Do not wish to go into much detail but could certain medical conditions backed up with various medical info help show or explain how this mistake was made???? ?

thanks to all posters much appreciated

Mara69

teddyboy02 wrote: »

...could certain medical conditions backed up with various medical info help show or explain how this mistake was made????

It wasn't a mistake - it was fraud. Look, seriously, stop wriggling. You've been caught. All the benefits forms make it very clear that you need to declare ALL monies in your possession. Being in debt won't wash and nor will an illness you've just thought about mentioning.

As another poster has said, the DWP don't care about your debt. It is irrelevant to them, they are interested in recouping benefits that have been paid out illegally.

Oh and debts paid to family members will be treated as deprivation of capital.