Benefit Investigation

FBaby

comeandgo wrote: »

There are previous posts from OP which give some insite to his problems.

Indeed, going back to a certain thread does provide the detail posters have been asking for and explain the initial post.

emsywoo123

FBaby wrote: »

Indeed, going back to a certain thread does provide the detail posters have been asking for and explain the initial post.

Phew, I do like these things solved!

So OP, said people are people are your brothers. The whole situation sounds shady and in this instance, I for one am pleased there will be an investigation!

angelsmomma

I am pleased they are investigating this too after reading your thread on how to get LHA for the house you all already own between you.

The expression 'so sharp he will cut himself one day' comes to mind.

Morglin

I am constantly, having worked there, amazed at the stupidity of people that think they can 'hide' money they have, from the DWP, in a UK bank account! :doh:

ALL accounts are linked to the Revenue, who, in turn, 'talk' to the DWP.

Declaring all savings etc., is the way to be, and that way, you will never have any hassles from the fraud or compliance departments.

Lin

publicsectorworker

Just in from work on logged on and seen the replies. the two threads don't involve the same people. said several times on this one there is no ct or hb being claimed. Was only asking about what could happen from an overpayment of JSA cos that's all that is involved then some people added in other things that don't apply but anyway thanks to those who advised on what was asked.

publicsectorworker

Morglin wrote: »

But the claimant is claiming a means tested benefit - the earnings related JSA.

If she were only on non means tested benefits, such as contributory ESA or DLA, then she could have millions in the bank and still be entitled to the benefits.

BUT, any means tested benefit is subject to income and savings, and that is why you have to declare them all, regardless of whether you think it's their business or not!

I'm still confused as to their relationship - either they are friends only or they are involved as a couple.

If they are aaying they are just friends, then they will need to show this, and explain what is going on with these bank accounts. If they have what would be construed as a relationship, by reasonable people, then that is how they will be classed.

To be honest, if you want advice from a public forum, you really need to say it how it actually is - and it's a dead cert the DWP won't put up with all this hedging when they interview her!

Lin

i meant neither is claiming any other means tested benefits so why would it matter if they were treated as living together anyway. Said straight off there's an investigation on JSA which was the query.

nannytone_2

you really arent reading the advice that is being given!
the fact that JSA is means tested is the issue.
then there is excess capital.
and a joint account.
on top of this...
no hb is being paid.
this makes the DWP wonder why.

someone who needs income related KSA yet has all their housing costs met?

can you tell me who the claimant lives with and their relationship to the claimant.
so far you have avoided this question.
but until you give a complete answer to this wuestion, no one can help
9 THATS IF THEY HAVENT GIVEN UP THE WILL TO LIVE ALREADY!)

GirlFromMars_2

publicsectorworker wrote: »

Just in from work on logged on and seen the replies. the two threads don't involve the same people. said several times on this one there is no ct or hb being claimed. Was only asking about what could happen from an overpayment of JSA cos that's all that is involved then some people added in other things that don't apply but anyway thanks to those who advised on what was asked.

... you don't appear to understand the significance of the relationship in relation to the JSA ...

... I believe this is because you think that ALL of the JSA has been claimed fraudulently, and that all of it will need to be paid back ... however this is dependent on the relationship status of the person who claimed the JSA ...

... even with the £5K undeclared capital it is possible that the claimant was entitled to some of the JSA they have claimed ...

... however if the claimant has an undeclared partner, the chances are they were entitled to none of it & will have to pay all of it back & face prosecution for fraud.

... if the claimant is indeed single then it is possible that the amount claimed fraudulently is significantly lower ...

So it is important whether they are in a relationship or not, even though it is just JSA that has been claimed erroneously ...

... people are bringing up Housing Benefit because the fact that it hasn't been claimed indicates that the people are indeed in a relationship, and that one person is supporting the other at least in terms of housing and having a joint bank account!

publicsectorworker

GirlFromMars wrote: »

... you don't appear to understand the significance of the relationship in relation to the JSA ...

they aren't in a relationship with anyone

GirlFromMars wrote: »

... I believe this is because you think that ALL of the JSA has been claimed fraudulently, and that all of it will need to be paid back ... however this is dependent on the relationship status of the person who claimed the JSA ...

... even with the £5K undeclared capital it is possible that the claimant was entitled to some of the JSA they have claimed

no i think some will have to be repaid depending how much dwp think they are over and how much they count as over for every 250 more they have its a pound a week

GirlFromMars wrote: »

... however if the claimant has an undeclared partner, the chances are they were entitled to none of it & will have to pay all of it back & face prosecution for fraud.

they don't they are single

GirlFromMars wrote: »

... if the claimant is indeed single then it is possible that the amount claimed fraudulently is significantly lower ...

as said before in thread they are

GirlFromMars wrote: »

So it is important whether they are in a relationship or not, even though it is just JSA that has been claimed erroneously ...

they aren't in a relationship and after i confirmed this was still asking advise on this basis same as in op

GirlFromMars wrote: »

... people are bringing up Housing Benefit because the fact that it hasn't been claimed indicates that the people are indeed in a relationship, and that one person is supporting the other at least in terms of housing and having a joint bank account!

they aren't in a relationship have said that. have asked for advise as though they aren't. support is not finical just support with thing the claimant finds difficult to sort.

first few posters answered most of queries about what could happen next which I've passed on.

Confuseddot

publicsectorworker wrote: »

they aren't in a relationship with anyone

no i think some will have to be repaid depending how much dwp think they are over and how much they count as over for every 250 more they have its a pound a week


they don't they are single

as said before in thread they are
they aren't in a relationship and after i confirmed this was still asking advise on this basis same as in op
they aren't in a relationship have said that. have asked for advise as though they aren't. support is not finical just support with thing the claimant finds difficult to sort.

first few posters answered most of queries about what could happen next which I've passed on.

Are you by any chance a politician ?


you may want to pass on that the dwp will have the same questions as most of the people on this thread and that they may have to prove their relationship status.