CT Fraud

Th1984

Hi all,

Let me firstly be very clear, I am asking for help to persuade my SIL and her partner to not attempt CT fraud when they move.

They are moving in a few days and have been advised by MIL to declare single occupant disregard to keep CT down as they can barely afford the new place (a completely different discussion). However this course of action leaves me feeling very nervous for them as CT fraud is a criminal matter as I understand it.

The SIL and her Bf are under the impression that as long as the BF keeps his post going to his mums and never uses the new address they will never be caught.

Can someone help me find/ offer case studies of how people have been caught who have tried this and the punishments they received so I can persuade them it is nt worth risking it for £20 per month.

Ta

Th1984

Danni-R

I cant provide facts/ dates etc but its not just the post. They can look at water/ electric. In the daily fail the other day it had someone was caught out as they had sky sports but it was paid for by the BF.

Neighbours could say something. They could drive past. If the mortgage is in both of their names it might start something off.



Its not worth it. They shouldnt need cases to know that. Never worth the risk in my view.

maninthestreet

If they both live at the property, they will both have to on the electoral roll for that address - they'll get a form delivered to the house once a year. By the law, they have to put both their names on that form. So that'll be another offence.

ermine

Th1984 wrote: »

Let me firstly be very clear, I am asking for help to persuade my SIL and her partner to not attempt CT fraud when they move.

And this is your business because of what, exactly?

Live your own values. Either man up and say to them directly "I believe you are about to perpetrate a criminal offence and I feel duty bound to grass you up". Then grass 'em up.

Or provide the information that you have done - that you believe that their assumptions about not getting caught are erroneous. You've then done your duty as a sibling, then !!!!!! and get on with your life.

Live your life by your own principles and values, either grass 'em up if that's your values, or don't if that accords with your values. Once you've informed them of your belief they are making a mistake they are presumably competent adults and can make their own decisions about the risks and rewards they are looking at taking. People always search for confirmation bias, it doesn't matter how many examples of nailed perps you find, it'll always be different for them because everyone thinks they are smarter than average

Th1984

@ermine, thanks

That makes the most sense with me. I have to pay it so everyone else should have to. I guess I felt bad for them because she could end up in a lot of trouble because of her own naievity and following bad advice.

Was after some evidence that I was correct in what I was saying as my mil will continually spout !!!! until people break down and believe her!

But you are quite correct, they are adults and need to be treated as such.

mrsbmartin

I second ermine's advice...let them live in constant fear of being caught out. What get's me is when people claim they do these things because they can't afford the extra expense...yet they still drink alcohol/smoke/have sky tv/get takeaways etc etc... that grinds my gears a bit!!! Know it all MIL's are quite standard...keep schtum and pick the battles that matter to you (then quietly do the 'told-you-so' dance in your head behind her back). SIL will learn her lesson at some point...

The_Earl_of_Streatham

ermine wrote: »

And this is your business because of what, exactly?

Because it would appear to be family and they think they might be in with a sporting chance of preventing an upset in the family which might have repercussions that effect them? Because the op might be taking a public spirited view and want to stop a potential crime? Any number of reasons. Anyone offering advice may be helping to prevent a crime. That's among the reasons people come here for advice and that's why people give it freely.

I thoroughly agree that one should live one's life by one's own precepts and that you're ultimately only really going to get a say in what you yourself do but there is a family interest, and beyond that even a public interest that it might be worth having a go at promoting.

This is a good place to try to get some suggestions from people with a different perspective to add weight to their arguments. I acknowledge that yours is one such.

I am close to someone who tried it on with housing benefit. If I'd known more at the time I might have been able to prevent it. I eventually had to go with them to court (I wasn't on the indictment, you understand, just there for moral support). It wasn't nice and if I'd been able to prevent I would have done and put myself out considerably to do so.

That said, I don't have much to offer here and for all I know there may be people behind bars (the iron sort) for taking my advice in the past. Best of luck with your persuasive efforts.

tim123456789

Danni-R wrote: »

I cant provide facts/ dates etc but its not just the post. They can look at water/ electric. In the daily fail the other day it had someone was caught out as they had sky sports but it was paid for by the BF.

.

I can't see that the difference between one and two people using the electric and water is going to be outside the norm for a single, wasteful person. Unless you are two wasteful people, of course.

And it's perfectly possible for someone who is not resident to pay for Sky at a relative/friend's house if, for example, they can't have it installed at their own home and really really want it!

Note that none of the above should be construed to imply that I think that avoiding CT is anything other than wrong!

tim

Danni-R

like I said, was just repeating what was in the daily fail.

Could have just been a scaremongering tactic to get people worried enough to own up to what they are doing.