Benefit Investigation

publicsectorworker

Caz3121 wrote: »

Income based JSA is affected by partners income so if they were classed as LTAHW and the other party works over 24 hours then there would be no JSA payment (irrespective of savings)

What is ltahw. Claimant does not have or live with a partner.

publicsectorworker

ceecee1 wrote: »

I will repeat myself again..... It is not your, or their decision to make. The correct course of action when claiming benefits is to answer all the questions honestly and declare all correct circumstances whether they be joint accounts or someone else in the household.

To fail to do so is to make a false statement and is a criminal offence under the Social Security Administration Act 1992.

i know it's not my decision but there's nothing to find in the partner thing. The investigation is for JSA and while they will look into the circumstances they can only find on what is wrong which is JSA. I'm not being awkward I never mentioned partner or relationship etc others did.

zagfles

publicsectorworker wrote: »

What is ltahw. Claimant does not have or live with a partner.

Living together as husband and wife (/civil partners). It's not up to the claimint to decide if the other person is their partner or not, if they act as and are seen as partners then they will treated as partners, and not be allowed to claim means tested benefits independantly.

The definition is very woolly, for instance it doesn't have to mean there's a sexual element to the relationship, and stuff like having joint accounts, sharing the cornflakes etc would be seen as evidence of LTAHAW/CP. Which is why nobody here can can give you any advice unless you describe the nature of the relationship.

publicsectorworker

northerntwo1 wrote: »

So a stranger lets them live rent free, they give up single occupancy for said stranger.

It happens all the time that does.

i haven't said stranger you have. I have said don't want to say and given reasons why.

nannytone_2

publicsectorworker wrote: »

i know it's not my decision but there's nothing to find in the partner thing. The investigation is for JSA and while they will look into the circumstances they can only find on what is wrong which is JSA. I'm not being awkward I never mentioned partner or relationship etc others did.

having/ being deemed to have a working partner whilst claiming income related JSA is relevant.
they could find that not only has there been an overpaymen... no payment should have been made.

publicsectorworker

nannytone wrote: »

you are totally missing the point that people are trying to make.
the fact that no housing council tax benefit is claimed, whilst JSA is would be an indicator that the person is receiving help financially from another person ( ie not being charged rent)
this isnt something that people usually do.... pay rent for someone/allow them to libe in your home rent free, unless there is some kind of relationship.... and it is this relationship that will be of interest as well as the undeclared savings/joint bank account.

just because someone says something is true, rarely means that the DWP will just accept it at face value. they will investigate and come to their conclusion.
the onus is on your friend to prove them wrong.
you say they have proof, so it should be OK.
but from the information you have passed on, it looks like they may have a fight on their hands

ok so if it were parent/sibling that would leave just JSA to investigate?

Dockley1

Soooo
Claimant has claimed approx £kk's of income based JSA which DWP think has been wrongly claimed over a 5 year period
Claimant says this was an oversight to keep claiming and not declare ISA savings of between 7-11k
Claimant lives with a person unrelated and also not in a relationship with
Claimant opens a joint bank account with the above non related non relationship person
Claimant then supplies joint bank account statements to DWP but blocks out unrelated person transactions on the statement

Claimant is a single person and receives no financial support from either their joint bank account owner or the owner of the house - are they the same person?
The owner of the house which is owned outright is just allowing the claimant to live there for free, not as a partner or relation

Have I got it correct so far....

They might need to get a job now to repay the overpaid £kk's of JSA

nannytone_2

publicsectorworker wrote: »

ok so if it were parent/sibling that would leave just JSA to investigate?

in theory, yes.
the DWP see it as a totally natural situation, that someone would live with a parent/close relative and that this person would be allowed to live rent free and be given every support merely because of the fact they are related.

for a 'stranger' ( ie someone not related) to do this, is more than slightly suspicious.

publicsectorworker

Dockley1 wrote: »

Soooo
Claimant has claimed approx £kk's of income based JSA which DWP think has been wrongly claimed over a 5 year period
Claimant says this was an oversight to keep claiming and not declare ISA savings of between 7-11k
Claimant lives with a person unrelated and also not in a relationship with
Claimant opens a joint bank account with the above non related non relationship person
Claimant then supplies joint bank account statements to DWP but blocks out unrelated person transactions on the statement

Claimant is a single person and receives no financial support from either their joint bank account owner or the owner of the house - are they the same person?
The owner of the house which is owned outright is just allowing the claimant to live there for free, not as a partner or relation

Have I got it correct so far....

They might need to get a job now to repay the overpaid £kk's of JSA

no last 4 points are wrong but as your new maybe you haven't had time to read what op has said.

Jobseeeker

Dockley1 wrote: »

Soooo
Claimant has claimed approx £kk's of income based JSA which DWP think has been wrongly claimed over a 5 year period
Claimant says this was an oversight to keep claiming and not declare ISA savings of between 7-11k
Claimant lives with a person unrelated and also not in a relationship with
Claimant opens a joint bank account with the above non related non relationship person
Claimant then supplies joint bank account statements to DWP but blocks out unrelated person transactions on the statement

Claimant is a single person and receives no financial support from either their joint bank account owner or the owner of the house - are they the same person?
The owner of the house which is owned outright is just allowing the claimant to live there for free, not as a partner or relation

Have I got it correct so far....

They might need to get a job now to repay the overpaid £kk's of JSA

They are related, they have said parent/sibling.

So the partner thing is not an issue just the savings account which was not declared.