Received an interview under caution letter - please help

tomtom256

CKhalvashi wrote: »

I'm with this.

The deal is, that if you're willing to pay it back, you won't be prosecuted.

I have only dealt with 2 prosecutions in the last 8 years, in the 100 cases I've represented, and these were both for 5 figures, where there's been blatent misrepresentation.

I also dealt with a case where there was a £6000 overpayment, because of a few hours of overtime each week, over about 4 years, which built up. This wasn't prosecuted, and the money was paid back over a 2 year period.

There is a lot of discretion in what will be prosecuted, and the government is more concerned about interviewing and trying all other avenues to prosecution, on the condition that it seems a genuine mistake.

CK

That is not the deal at all and is misleading.

I do this job day in day out.

Look up the DWP or LA sanction policy for your area it will show that the majority of overpayments over £2k is generally a prosecution from the outset, unless there is mitigating circumstances i.e. mental health. http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/sanction-policy.pdf LA's sanction policy tend to mirror this.

Prosecution is always the last outcome as previously stated and if under £2k it is normally dealt with via a caution (if fully admitted) or an administrative penalty if not admitted.

CKhalvashi

This may be your experience, but in our LA, I can assure you that this is not the case, as a number of others have confirmed.

In all honesty, if it's genuine error, it will never be in the public interest to prosecute, nor will the costs be justified.

sistafromanothermista

CKhalvashi wrote: »

This may be your experience, but in our LA, I can assure you that this is not the case, as a number of others have confirmed.

In all honesty, if it's genuine error, it will never be in the public interest to prosecute, nor will the costs be justified.

I agree. OP the same thing happened with my sister (see previus thread) genuine mistake.
It ended with them sending her 3 court summons and a court date. She was entitled to legal aid and in the end she entered into a payment plan. End of story. Hers was around 3-4k.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

TBH your rights in a IUC is to remain silent after confirming your name and address, the interview is purely a evidence gathering excersize, it can be beneficial to you and to them it works both ways.


if you have evidence to suggest that you sent copies of letters its not upto you to prove they were posted, its upto them to prove they didn't receive them. if you called them then ask them to rout through their call list and recorded calls.


your obligations go so far as only to inform them of changes if that's by letter phone or other means of usable and available technology they have then that's it you dont have to prove they received lost or misplaced your notification of changes.


you can take anyone, you also have the right to video/audio record the interview for your own records.


ive been to 2 IUC and had four home checks done.


in each case ive had evidence to back me up.


In one interview the attitude of the interviewer prompted my complete silence, he accused me from the onset of deliberately trying to commit fraud and his tone and line of questioning was fixed to that angle that he approached the interview with, after answering my name and address, he spurted out he had enough evidence to convict of fraud and asked me why I had tried to deliberately claim IS when I wasn't entitled to it, I replied I have not committed any offence as to what you claim, he got shirty with me and after that I handed my evidence to him and asked if I was free to leave, he tried to say I was detained under caution when I reminded him that he doesn't have that power and walked out. I then proceeded to make a complaint, and was sent a letter to say that everything was fine and that it was a clerical error on their part.

Morlock

tibawo wrote: »

Don't know what to put down on sheet for time off as they like to see copies of appointments etc.

You don't have to attend the interview under caution, it is a request under PACE to attend, not a legal requirement. You could phone them up and rearrange a convenient date, or sort out the overpayment using phone or e-mail.

jacques_chirac

sistafromanothermista wrote: »

I agree. OP the same thing happened with my sister (see previus thread) genuine mistake.
It ended with them sending her 3 court summons and a court date. She was entitled to legal aid and in the end she entered into a payment plan. End of story. Hers was around 3-4k.

You are contradicting yourself - your sister was taken to court, but now you are trying to say it does not happen?

tomtom256 is correct, and has of course quoted the relevant guidance. OP, if you are unsure you are always best to rely on an official source, as tomtom256 has kindly provided.

Trishy78

Hi there


I'm new to this site and just wanted some advice on my current situation. On Monday I had an interview under caution as my local authority have advised that they have not received notification that my working hours had increased.


I explained to them that when I updated my changes with WTC they indeed had notified them and that I had also sent written confirmation to them which unfortunately they had no records of. With every change I have made with WTC they have passed the details onto the local authority.


I did not keep a copy of the lettersent so it's a case of their word against mine. I did say at the interview that I will need to search through my paperwork and the officer is willing to see if I can find my evidence. I have searched high and low but cannot seem to find any proof.


I am very nervous as to the next cause of action, I have never been in trouble before and I am worried what will happen. There is an overpayment and of course I will pay it back. The officer also said that it is from a one year period.


Please advice anyone if you have been in a similar situation.


Thank you.

Housing_Benefit_Officer

This claimant is going to trial over an overpayment of £2,640 - then again she is an elected Councillor!

http://www.thurrockgazette.co.uk/news/10865017.Thurrock_councillor_denies_benefit_fraud_charge/

Ky-An

Under caution does not mean you will be prosecuted you may simply have to pay back the amount with a penalty. Many of my customers have gone down this road and was slapped with a penalty.

tibawo

Been for interview. Went on my own. Answered honestly. They seem to think it should be quickly sorted. Really weird as chatting about informal things then in interview it went formal but not nasty. Then once tape off guy was telling me they do this every day and it's his job no matter if it's a fiver or fifty grand. I was till shaking though.