Housing/Council Tax Benefit: FRAUD investigation!

sarymclary

Hi,
My BF has to attend a meeting tomorrow, under caution, for a meeting regarding an investigation DWP has done for a fraudulent claim they think he's made for council tax & housing benefit.

The thing is, he's in receipt of Incapacity Benefit due to a spinal problem (which was reviewed successfully last October), has been a single parent up until 3 weeks ago, when his 13 y/o son moved in with his mother, after 5 years with his dad.

BF told DWP & FTC people on the day his son moved out that his circumstances had changed.

We are at a bit of a loss to know what the investigation could be for. We thought it might be because he's sold a friend's motorbikes on ebay after tarting them up for him, but that's been a hobby not a business venture. Otherwise, despite us living apart, could it be to do with our relationship and the fact that we spend most daytimes together?? We have separate living expenses, bills, etc. He stays over maybe once every fortnight, but not more often. Have read a previous thread where an ex partner was considered to be co-habiting because they ate tea together, and he went shopping with her; it this possible?!

Any suggestions appreciated.

cattie

It seems it could be one of any of the things mentioned in your post, so it's not really possible for anybody here to say what the reason for the interview is.

Best thing is for him to go in & be as honest as possible. He can take an advocate or anybody else for support if he wishes, but they will not be able to speak on his behalf.

Gaz83

To be honest, I reckon a lot of people would be a bit suspicious of someone who can't work and is in receipt of IB due to a spinal problem but is still able to do up and sell motorbikes, maybe someone who lives near him and sees him doing this has reported him.

EDIT: Oh, and HMRC never count a person as co-habiting if they're having tea and going shopping together, so I strongly suspect that anyone who has said that was exaggerating.

bestpud

I thought that about the bikes too - depends how many bikes and how much 'work' is actually involved I guess.

Re the eating tea and shopping together. A friend was investigated four years ago, as neighbours reported her for having a new partner. The partner only stayed every now and again, but was there from about 6 until about 11ish most evenings and from about 9am until the same time weekends. She was not prosecuted but had to stop claiming because they said he was spending over half their 'social' time (classed as non-sleeping or working time) with her and her children. She was told they would seek to prosecute her if she carried on claiming.

real1314

"Sold a friend's motorbikes"?

how many, and at what profit? Selling your own posessions is not trading, selling someone elses at a profit is trading. Also, claiming incap whilst being able to work as a motor(bike) mechanic would raise questions.

TheWaltons_3

The original poster said he is being investigated for council tax and housing benefit fraud - him claiming his other benefits fraudulently is of no interest to them :rotfl:

sarymclary

TheWaltons wrote: »

The original poster said he is being investigated for council tax and housing benefit fraud - him claiming his other benefits fraudulently is of no interest to them :rotfl:

Thanks for noticing TheWaltons.

This is exactly where the confusion is for this whole thing really. FWIW, he's done the bikes over a period of several months, on and off, as and when he feels fit; not in the winter months because his back is worse in colder weather. He can potter in and out whenever he feels able, but this isn't heavy mechanic work, more cosmetic work, such as spraying bodywork & sticker kits, and this can be done sitting down too, as he can't stand for lengthy periods. He's been stir crazy not working, so getting his mate's bikes looking nice has been a good distraction; we get a chinese meal for his efforts.

The BF & mate used to race bikes together years back, so there's a motorbiking relationship history here, and the mate now has 2 businesses he runs which means he doesn't have the time anymore, which is why he asked the BF to advertise a couple for him on ebay, which I think sold out of auction anyway, so the sale can't be proven, but the profit won't have been vast (these have been cheap bikes of a few hundred pounds, with small profit). My BF had 2 bikes when he had to stop working, but he sold these over a year ago to fund Xmas for his kids.

Having had 4 ops on his back now, he's not exactly blagging his condition, and having seen him carted off in an ambulance unable to move & crying in pain, using gas & air, I'd say he's been more than convincing to me! It's been a long road to recovery, and he is improving, but it's not nice being judged when you consider yourself a genuine claimant.

He's worked for 25 years without days off sick prior to this, so thanks for all those who have judged my BF's condition, but I digress. There is a process of medical questionaires and examinations to qualify for IB, and he had to appeal the original decision before a panel of 3 people in order to get his benefit. Believe you me, living on IB compared to a regular wage isn't easily done, and he'd rather have his old job/life back, if he could do it. You don't have to be in a coma or in an iron lung in order to qualify for IB you know.

We were simply intrigued as to how a claim for COUNCIL TAX & HOUSING BENEFIT, could have been made fraudulently, because we were at a loss to work it out. I had hoped someone with some knowledge of this process could help, which is why I gave the information I did.

TheWaltons_3

sarymclary wrote: »

We were simply intrigued as to how a claim for COUNCIL TAX & HOUSING BENEFIT, could have been made fraudulently, because we were at a loss to work it out. I had hoped someone with some knowledge of this process could help, which is why I gave the information I did.

Me too - I could understand if they were investigating his IB as someone up the road could have phoned up the Benefits Investigation team.. but spraying a few bike parts in his own property can't be classed as fraud in my opinion.. .what's he supposed to do? Sit in the house all day miserable and ignore a hobby?

Don't worry about it... I am sure it will turn out to be nothing.. perhaps just a check..

Gaz83

TheWaltons wrote: »

The original poster said he is being investigated for council tax and housing benefit fraud - him claiming his other benefits fraudulently is of no interest to them :rotfl:

Well, people are given Housing and Council Tax Benefit because they're not in a position where they can work, so if he's saying that he's got a bad back but someone has reported him doing work on motorbikes, and they start thinking: "well hang on, maybe this chap's back's not as bad as they say it is"; it's actually pretty common for all the benefits agencies to do a combined investigation and pool resources for it.

So no, it's not "of no interest to them", and from the information you gave in the original post, that's what I (and others) seen as the thing out the ordinary.

It could just be a random check.

Anthillmob

it wouldnt be anything to do with his son moving out as that was a recent thing, whatever it is would be something from a while back that they have been looking into before calling him in for interview.

if he's honest with them, has nothing to hide then he will have nothing to worry about, it could all be based on a malicious referall.

deary65

As you seem to be genuine in the sentiments which you express, here is your position and legal standing on the matter.

Although it may be to late now, if you receive such a letter, you should always write back and ask the reason for the interview, together with a request for a list of questions which they intend to ask.

As you can then take legal advice on the matter. However you can still phone and ask for the interview to be postponed to a later date and then write the said letter. Under the HRA you have a right not incriminate yourself and at common law you can always refuse to attain any interview with them unless you are giving good reasons for doing so. I always quote the following.

Rice v Connolly [1966] 2 QB 414 in which which Lord Goddard CJ stated:

"It seems to me quite clear that though every citizen has a moral duty or, if you like, a social duty to assist the police, there is no legal duty to that effect, and indeed the whole basis of the common law is the right of the individual to refuse to answer questions put to him by persons in authority, and to refuse to accompany those in authority to any particular place, short, of course, of arrest."