Benefit fraud partly under age. PLEASE advise.

Morglin

Follow up on geting a solicitor, (the CAB or welfare rights may be able to advise) because there are a lot of issues here - but don't worry, from experience, (worked for them), there is no way the DWP would prosecute someone of your age, when the alleged 'offence' occurred, over 3 weeks overpayment.

Any magistrate would throw it straight out of court, so the worse that will happen here is that the amount has to be repaid.

But, a solicitor will also be able to advise on the behaviour of the official, and whether they have some sort of case to answer.

So, find a decent solitor and let him deal with it.

Lin

PippaGirl_2

I doubt their investigations would be so thorough had the issue just been 3 weeks overpayment, I suspect the forms the LL completed and the OP signed may well have been incorrect/fraudulent.

paulmapp8306

I agree with PippaGirl - I think this is the issue the investigator thinks she has uncovered, and the reason for the indepth interview and subsequent meetings with Ex Landlords.

The issue is, that the OP cannot proove her Ex Landlord gave false information as ultimately her signature was on the form. The investigator has no way of knowing the false information (assuming there is some here), and even if the OP tells her what happened - its only the OPs word, theres no evidance.

this is where I believe the issue is. This is why the OP neesd a solicitor. She needs to go through what ACTUALLY happened, and possibly outline what she THINKS may have been done by her ex landlord (again though - there is only speculation at this point thta there ight be a problem here). Then the solicitor can advise on a way forward.

Id like to say the OP has nothing to worry about - but it may well come down to whether the investigation believes what she says (whcih in turn may hinge on whether theres a history of claiming things shes not entitled too - which unfortunately there is - no matter how small). if they DO believe her - they may try and go after the ex-landlord instead, but where is the proof he did anything wrong either?

If there IS false information on the claim, then there IS fraud. Prooving who comitted the fraud is going to be difficult - and only the signature on the form is evidence. Everything else is one persons word against anothers.

As for the investigator themselves with the father of the boyfriend. The OP does NOT know what was said - she wasnt there. The man in question may THINK he knows, but MAY have misinterpreted. There may have been some information given out that shouldnt have been - and HE should be making the main complaint here if hes not happy. Obviously if the OP comes by the information (as she has) she can raise her own concerns - but she cant proove anything there either. She cant even give her version of events because she wasnt there. She can only say "its come to my attention that X happened". It will be looked at, but I dont think the OP will be involved. It will most likely be interviews with the investigator and the ex landlord in question - with both accounts of events taken before a decision is reached. Again - I doubt anything more than a slap on the wrist for the investigator - as once again no proof exists as the interview wasnt recorded. Its is - once again - one persons word against another. In this case the fact that the Ex Landlord has reasonably close connections with the OP may actually go against that investigation as it could be seen as collusion due to her being investigated.

terryw

Excellent post above.

Another possibility is that the OP refers to her "partner". This MAY be looked at as a possible LTAHAW. Possibly.

dd101

Hi,

Sorry I may not have been clear, although they haven't laud there cards down yet, this is what they seem to be accusing me of;

Address 1: claiming I had come from here when I hadn't (landlord provided info and was paid to him)

Address 2: living with my partner in my partners house. I rented a room from a retired couple, I was a friend of their son who lived in SPAIN at the time. He is NOW my partner bit we have been together 2 years, this was approx 3 years ago.

ADDRESS 2: not living with partner but being in a relationship of the son and therefore he was paying my rent and I was pocketing the benefit

ADDRESS 2: not living there at all

ADDRESS 3: 3 weeks overpayment, don't know if they are accusing me of anything but I did get overpayment here which I admitted.

ADDRESS 1: 16 years old
ADDRESS 2 17 years old
ADDRESS 3: 18 and 19 years old

Sorry I cannot read your post and reply at the sane time as I am on my phone and cannot see what I am writing properly but this is the basics.

paulmapp8306 wrote: »

I agree with PippaGirl - I think this is the issue the investigator thinks she has uncovered, and the reason for the indepth interview and subsequent meetings with Ex Landlords.

The issue is, that the OP cannot proove her Ex Landlord gave false information as ultimately her signature was on the form. The investigator has no way of knowing the false information (assuming there is some here), and even if the OP tells her what happened - its only the OPs word, theres no evidance.

this is where I believe the issue is. This is why the OP neesd a solicitor. She needs to go through what ACTUALLY happened, and possibly outline what she THINKS may have been done by her ex landlord (again though - there is only speculation at this point thta there ight be a problem here). Then the solicitor can advise on a way forward.

Id like to say the OP has nothing to worry about - but it may well come down to whether the investigation believes what she says (whcih in turn may hinge on whether theres a history of claiming things shes not entitled too - which unfortunately there is - no matter how small). if they DO believe her - they may try and go after the ex-landlord instead, but where is the proof he did anything wrong either?

If there IS false information on the claim, then there IS fraud. Prooving who comitted the fraud is going to be difficult - and only the signature on the form is evidence. Everything else is one persons word against anothers.

As for the investigator themselves with the father of the boyfriend. The OP does NOT know what was said - she wasnt there. The man in question may THINK he knows, but MAY have misinterpreted. There may have been some information given out that shouldnt have been - and HE should be making the main complaint here if hes not happy. Obviously if the OP comes by the information (as she has) she can raise her own concerns - but she cant proove anything there either. She cant even give her version of events because she wasnt there. She can only say "its come to my attention that X happened". It will be looked at, but I dont think the OP will be involved. It will most likely be interviews with the investigator and the ex landlord in question - with both accounts of events taken before a decision is reached. Again - I doubt anything more than a slap on the wrist for the investigator - as once again no proof exists as the interview wasnt recorded. Its is - once again - one persons word against another. In this case the fact that the Ex Landlord has reasonably close connections with the OP may actually go against that investigation as it could be seen as collusion due to her being investigated.

dd101

Sorry ignore my last reply. I am using a cracked iPhone and I cannot see the mistakes I'm typing.

So everyOne is clearer, I am being accused of this;

Address 1/ 16 years old: claiming I had come from state care to fraudulently claim benefits.

Address 2/ 17 years old. I rented a room from a retired couple. They are the parents of my current partner. We met through my old job at address 1 and he put me in touch with his parents as they used to rent rooms to students and me and my flat mate couldn't afford to stay at flat one. My current partner back then was just a work friend (company had bases in il where I worked and SPAIN where he worked)
Im being accused at this address of wither sharing a room in his parents house with HIM therefore I wouldn't be entitled OR not sharing with him but him paying the rent and I pocketed benefits OR living there free.

I have been accused of this because typically my bank statements showed;
In (£160 benefit)
Out £40/ £10/ £20/ £50 etc.

I declared on my form I receive charitable payments of approx £250 PCM CASH. my rent was paid weekly in cash. So I used to only withdraw out of my bank the shortfall of money I needed. Then use the benefits to buy food etc which is what the charitable payments were for.

ADDRESS 3/ 18 and 19 years old, not sure what I'm accused of but I admitted a 3 week overpayment.

Thanks I hope that's clearer.

dd101

Hi,

The 3 weeks overpayment is when I was 19 years old. I am being accused of all sorts of offences when I was 16 and 17.

If you read above at a quick post I made , it explains the accusations a bit clearer.

Thank you, really approciate your reply!

Morglin wrote: »

Follow up on geting a solicitor, (the CAB or welfare rights may be able to advise) because there are a lot of issues here - but don't worry, from experience, (worked for them), there is no way the DWP would prosecute someone of your age, when the alleged 'offence' occurred, over 3 weeks overpayment.

Any magistrate would throw it straight out of court, so the worse that will happen here is that the amount has to be repaid.

But, a solicitor will also be able to advise on the behaviour of the official, and whether they have some sort of case to answer.

So, find a decent solitor and let him deal with it.

Lin