Benefit Investigation

Housing_Benefit_Officer

publicsectorworker wrote: »

does this make a difference the other person claims no benefits.

What is the relationship?

publicsectorworker

rogerblack wrote: »

From the data protection act point of view, and the accessing data - no.

As above - the intents are the important bit.
If money was put into the account, with the intent of both parties that it remained the property of the person putting it into the account - then that may not count as capital.
(assuming that is accepted, something which may be difficult)

If it's just someone putting money into someone elses account intentionally, without notifying them - it's extremely difficult to say that that is other than a gift with them intending for the money to be theirs.

they are not trying to make the overpayment lower by claiming its a gift etc they are willing to pay back overpayment but the none claimants information isn't relevant to the claim

publicsectorworker

Housing_Benefit_Officer wrote: »

What is the relationship?

Don't want to say on here but they are not partners. One claims one doesn't. why might that matter?

Housing_Benefit_Officer

publicsectorworker wrote: »

Don't want to say on here but they are not partners. One claims one doesn't. why might that matter?

It is difficult to see the entire picture in a jigsaw if there are pieces missing.

So what is the relationship of the other person named on the account?

Morglin

You cannot have a joint ISA,, do she needs to show whose account it is.

If she has a working partner, I'm unclear how she is getting Income Support/earnings related JSA anyway.

For just one ISA, and if she is only claiming JSA, it's probably unlikely they would prosecute - it's more likely to be something that she will need to repay at x amount per week (the payment amounts are laid down by formula).

Going to court would be a waste of money, as most magistrates would just order a small fine, and possibly repayment anyway.

But, if she has loads of hidden accounts, then it will be different.

She needs to go to the interview, with all of her paperwork, and tell them the truth.

If she needs legal advice, then the CAB usually have a list of community lawyers.

It really is daft trying to conceal accounts - they are easily traced via the Revenue records.

Lin

publicsectorworker

Morglin wrote: »

You cannot have a joint ISA,, do she needs to show whose account it is.

If she has a working partner, I'm unclear how she is getting Income Support/earnings related JSA anyway.

For just one ISA, and if she is only claiming JSA, it's probably unlikely they would prosecute - it's more likely to be something that she will need to repay at x amount per week (the payment amounts are laid down by formula).

Going to court would be a waste of money, as most magistrates would just order a small fine, and possibly repayment anyway.

But, if she has loads of hidden accounts, then it will be different.

She needs to go to the interview, with all of her paperwork, and tell them the truth.

If she needs legal advice, then the CAB usually have a list of community lawyers.

It really is daft trying to conceal accounts - they are easily traced via the Revenue records.

Lin

claimant is single no relationship. Joint acc is not isa an is for low credit score reasons. No hb or ct is claimed. Excepted that overpayment has happened and wants to pay back. None claimant doesn't want there credit score or details brought into it as they are not claiming. Why ask for statements if they just get them anyway. Two accounts involved one isa one joint not isa.

rogerblack

publicsectorworker wrote: »

Why ask for statements if they just get them anyway. Two accounts involved one isa one joint not isa.

Because guilty people hide things!
It makes it _WAY_ easier to investigate if you have two documents, one of which the claimant has amended on the assumption you only have their document.

It also means that they can assess if likelihood of criminal intent at benefit fraud was there.

If it wasn't - then yes - simply repaying the overpayment is a possibility.

If it was - then a prosecution for benefit fraud may be triggered.

You have not quite answered the earlier point.

Was the money placed into the account by the second person intended to remain the property of that second person.

If it was not - then it counts fully as capital.
If it was - it may be disregarded.
(In principle, if this fact is accepted by the DWP/LA)

Housing_Benefit_Officer

publicsectorworker wrote: »

claimant is single no relationship. Joint acc is not isa an is for low credit score reasons. No hb or ct is claimed. Excepted that overpayment has happened and wants to pay back. None claimant doesn't want there credit score or details brought into it as they are not claiming. Why ask for statements if they just get them anyway. Two accounts involved one isa one joint not isa.

So how is the other person related to the claimant - you still have not answered this? And how did this other person choose the claimant to open a joint bank account with?

Morglin

publicsectorworker wrote: »

claimant is single no relationship. Joint acc is not isa an is for low credit score reasons. No hb or ct is claimed. Excepted that overpayment has happened and wants to pay back. None claimant doesn't want there credit score or details brought into it as they are not claiming. Why ask for statements if they just get them anyway. Two accounts involved one isa one joint not isa.

Nobody's credit score will be bought into it, but the DWP need to establish exactly what savings the claimant has, and what exactly has been overpaid.

So, take all the paperwork relating to all and any accounts connected to the claimant, and she needs to tell them the truth.

If she is saying that some of this money is not hers, then she will need to prove it, and they may wish to interview the other party involved. If she isn't in a partnership, and has this joint account with a friend, then there must be records of whose is what.

Low credit scoring is irrelevant - basic bank accounts can be opened by anyone, without a credit check.

Because she has misled them, they will now want proof of everything.
Lin

FBaby

You don't seem to understand what a joint account is. It means that all the money in it belongs to both. It means either can withdraw all of it. From a benefit perspective, if that person had access to all what was on the account (which they would as per the rules of a joint account), then it all belonged to them. Trying to hide transactions that they didn't make is hiding some of that's person access to funds, which could potentially be considered benefit fraud.