Interview Under Caution for Benefit Fraud investigation

missapril75

snookey wrote: »

Hi I found this advice for you from a poverty action group;

".....The Child Poverty Action Group's Welfare Benefits and Tax Credits Handbook has more info on how fraud investigations work, you can consult it at ACE, or it should be available via the library."

I read through that and the language used didn't sound anything like that of the child poverty action group. The CPAG is a brilliant organisation.
To be fair, snookey didn't say it was the CPAG but it did sort of look like it.

I took a random paragraph and googled. It comes from the Edinburgh Coalition Against Poverty and much of the rest of the page includes what one would expect to read from Class War.
Some sample comments from the same page quoted:

If you're being harassed by ”fraud” squad bullies from the Department of Work and Pensions...

If benefits snoopers turn up at your door, don't let them in and don't speak to them

DON'T GRASS ON YOUR OWN CLASS
THE RICH AND THE POLITICIANS ARE THE REAL CRIMINALS

if you have savings on which you pay interest, and these savings are above the level allowed for benefits, it is possible the DWP will find out. It is probably less likely it will come to light if the savings are spread over several accounts. Using different variations of your name on the accounts, eg different middle names, may also make the savings less likely to be discovered.

Not that they're encouraging deceit of course.

Similarly if you work through the books for any length of time, giving your national insurance number, and at the same time claim benefits which are not permitted, it is almost certain that this will, sooner or later, come to the attention of the DWP. On the other hand it is not easy for them to uncover cash in hand work, unless someone grasses you up, and even then they probably won't have proof.

Or perhaps they are.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with claimants breaking the benefit laws to get money needed to survive.

http://www.edinburghagainstpoverty.org.uk/node/21

missapril75

Mumof1littlegirl wrote: »

The interviewer blatantly told me that if I change my story and admit he's been living with me, they won't be taking any action against him.

Of course not, because it would then be you in the wrong.
It certainly looks as if he (the interviewer) is hoping that you don't want him (your ex) to get into trouble so you'll reach some sort of compromise and say you have been together for part of the time.

There may be some jobs where it's a disciplinary matter not to advise of an address (it was in mine) and it may be wrong not to report a current address (if only a "care of" one) to certain agencies.

That doesn't always make it an offence and even if it did, any punishment isn't going to be the maximum allowed just like that. Not having a TV licence, for example, might mean a fine up to £1000 but the average fine is under £200.

Slowhand

Interesting change...?

snookey

missapril75 Hi I did not paste the rest of their information due to the nature of it ie encouraging fraud .

I should have given the web address.

sniggings

Mumof1littlegirl wrote: »

The interviewer blatantly told me that if I change my story and admit he's been living with me, they won't be taking any action against him.

Sounds like blackmail to me, if those were the words he used and you have a recording of it, you can either/both put in a complaint about him or report him to the police.

zzzLazyDaisy

Mumof1littlegirl wrote: »

In the mean time...any ideas on this? Or is he just clutching at straws trying to scare me into a guilty admission?

THIS ^^^^^

All the stuff about the ex getting into trouble with other organisations over addresses may or may not have some truth in it - but that's not the point, and those issues do not directly concern this investigation against you - he is just using it to try and bully you into 'confessing'.

Your ex won't be interviewed under caution because he is not a party to the alleged fraud, he is being interviewed as a potential witness against you!

So he needs to be very clear about the fact that he doesn't live with you (that is the ONLY issue under investigation here) and to bring as much evidence as possible to support that. For example can he get a statement from the person/people who he has been living with? If he is registered with a GP or dentist to a different address, or if he has a different address at the bank anything like that, he should take along proof.

Whatever the outcome, you really need to put a stop to him being registered at your address for anything - post DVLA etc etc. He is an adult and must find some other address for these things. Tell him if you get any more post for him at your address you will have to return it to sender as 'not at this address' - that's the only way to ensure he is removed from your address, if he doesn't sort it out himself.

Good Luck!

FBaby

They are trying to put pressure on you because more and more people who pretend not to be a couple are well aware of what they need to say and do to insure that it can't be proven that they really are living together, so they instead try to use frightening tactics.

One thing I don't understand though is why are you so keen on trying to protect your ex? Why would YOU make all these calls? Surely you are in this situation because HE failed to do what he had to do. I personally would be angry with my ex if that had happened, even if we were still on friendly terms, not wanting to do everything to insure THEY didn't get into trouble.

BurnleyBob

'He asked who my car insurance was through, and why they had a record of my ex paying a payment with his debit card.'

'... he [the ex] has never claimed a benefit in his life.'

I'm scratching my head about those OP comments. I don't get how the DWP snooper gained authority to poke his long hooter into the private financial affairs of someone who has never claimed a benefit from the state.

laineybird2000

I worked for the dvla for donkeys, never heard of them prosecuting for having an old address on your driving license. It would cost them way too much to manage doing it.
The v5 is a bit more tricky, but only in terms of it invalidating your insurance. If you have it insured at another address but v5 has a different address, the insurance teams think you're trying to get cheaper insurance.

You feeling a bit better about everything now?

BurnleyBob

Mumof1littlegirl wrote: »

Hi Bob.

I don't think he was able too. He found out my car insurance details, and contacted them and asked how and who by all my payments were made. They obviously told him that the 1st payment had been made by a debit card in my exs name.

In the interviewers defence, he never mentioned he had my exs bank statements etc...only mine. And because I'm being investigated he had the authority to look into all my finances.

I'm pretty sure he would have rang all the utility companies too, and tried to find out the same information, but of course, ex hasn't paid any payments to them, only me, from either my account or my debit card....so that would have shown nothing. All that came back was one solitary card payment for insurance.

You may be correct but I somehow doubt that any insurance company would disclose that information without being compelled to by law because of the Data Protection Act 1998.