Accused of fraud/ IUC

Dekota

It's quite a hefty sum, yes, Im sure the friend won't have any problems about proving its his however theres nothing in writing that Person X had been given the money, will that cause a problem?

atrixblue.-MFR-.

Dekota wrote: »

It's quite a hefty sum, yes, Im sure the friend won't have any problems about proving its his however theres nothing in writing that Person X had been given the money, will that cause a problem?

what needs to hapen is the sums add up if the pension statements fit the amount that was siezed then there you go, but if not then theres a problem.

if were talking a couple of grand here and i think we are more than 6k to be notified of undeclaired savings by the fraud investigation team at JCP/DWP, thats not managing someones money who has a gambling problem thats saving up and concealing moneys from the JCP/DWP to give an accurate award and retaining the some money to give to others in need.

even if this were manageing system where by person x's friend totted up the cash from left over allowance its still saving.

like i said if x's friend is on benefits and this cash would affect his money he should be in the interview seat along with person x to sort this problem out.

even if it were winnings from gambling this must be declaired as an income or savings.

what makes this worse is that person x doesnt have written power of attourney over his friends finances, only verbal contract wich can be hard to prove is in place and taken as hearsay.

if person x's friend can prove most of the cash is his this can be returned and money deducted from the amount siezed the rest can still be held under proceeds of crime act i doubt this will happen and is rare for the police to do this as the whole amount is now evidence. you cannot go in with a veiw of hardship as person x's friend has been managing quite alright without without it.

at this stage i reccomend you tell person x and friend to get legal representaion. its an interview under caution and entiteled to have legal rep there with him/them.

Chrissiew

In your original post it said X was looking after the money, in your last post it says he was given the money, There will be a huge difference when it comes to DWP and fraud.

Dekota

Chrissiew wrote: »

In your original post it said X was looking after the money, in your last post it says he was given the money, There will be a huge difference when it comes to DWP and fraud.

Sorry, this shouldn't be miss understtod, the money was being looked after by person X.

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

what needs to hapen is the sums add up if the pension statements fit the amount that was siezed then there you go, but if not then theres a problem.

if were talking a couple of grand here and i think we are more than 6k to be notified of undeclaired savings by the fraud investigation team at JCP/DWP, thats not managing someones money who has a gambling problem thats saving up and concealing moneys from the JCP/DWP to give an accurate award and retaining the some money to give to others in need.

even if this were manageing system where by person x's friend totted up the cash from left over allowance its still saving.

like i said if x's friend is on benefits and this cash would affect his money he should be in the interview seat along with person x to sort this problem out.

even if it were winnings from gambling this must be declaired as an income or savings.

what makes this worse is that person x doesnt have written power of attourney over his friends finances, only verbal contract wich can be hard to prove is in place and taken as hearsay.

if person x's friend can prove most of the cash is his this can be returned and money deducted from the amount siezed the rest can still be held under proceeds of crime act i doubt this will happen and is rare for the police to do this as the whole amount is now evidence. you cannot go in with a veiw of hardship as person x's friend has been managing quite alright without without it.

at this stage i reccomend you tell person x and friend to get legal representaion. its an interview under caution and entiteled to have legal rep there with him/them.

No paperwork was kept because there is a level of trust between person X and the friend.

Where can legal representatives be found who can help? Cheers

Any other advice regarding this will be appreciated

rogerblack

Dekota wrote: »

No paperwork was kept because there is a level of trust between person X and the friend.

Where can legal representatives be found who can help? Cheers

Any other advice regarding this will be appreciated

It may be worth his friend also attending, and explaining the situation.

It is in their interests to do so, simply as if the money is found to be your friends, then once the benefit investigation has completed, if they find it to be your friends, they will likely then be prosecuted for benefit fraud.

The money may be viewed as proceeds of this benefit fraud, and confiscated.

If the money is determined to be your friends - and prosecution does not occur - then they give this back to their friend, they will be treated as still having the money for benefits purposes, leading to reduced, or no benefit entitlement in the future for some period.
'Notional capital'.

If this is a significant sum, with the likelyhood of criminal prosecution, if the DWP determine that an overpayment of over a couple of thousand pounds has occurred, you absolutely need to find a solicitor.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

legal rep nearest solicitor.

theres nothing more that i can say or advise really other than whats already been said.

dseventy

Dekota wrote: »

Any other advice regarding this will be appreciated

Tell your "friend" (person X) that whilst he is claiming means tested benefits its not a good idea to "hold" vast sums of money for other people.

Thats my advice.

D70

Dekota

rogerblack wrote: »

It may be worth his friend also attending, and explaining the situation.

It is in their interests to do so, simply as if the money is found to be your friends, then once the benefit investigation has completed, if they find it to be your friends, they will likely then be prosecuted for benefit fraud.

The money may be viewed as proceeds of this benefit fraud, and confiscated.

If the money is determined to be your friends - and prosecution does not occur - then they give this back to their friend, they will be treated as still having the money for benefits purposes, leading to reduced, or no benefit entitlement in the future for some period.
'Notional capital'.

If this is a significant sum, with the likelyhood of criminal prosecution, if the DWP determine that an overpayment of over a couple of thousand pounds has occurred, you absolutely need to find a solicitor.

Many thanks for this reply, very helpful. Instead of a solicitor, would a legal rep suffice?

rogerblack

Dekota wrote: »

Many thanks for this reply, very helpful. Instead of a solicitor, would a legal rep suffice?

Your friend is potentially facing a prison sentence if things do not go their way, for benefit fraud.
A solicitor who understands benefit law is a really good plan.