Possible Benefit Fraud

sofaspud1234

NYM wrote: »

What about suspected criminal activity ? Is it ignored unless there is hard proof provided by a member of the public :silenced:

Are you really a law student ?


*edit*

No need to reply. I've just read some of your posting history...:rotfl:

A law student that's been to prison too :rotfl::T

BillJones

K0SS wrote: »

I am talking "benefit fraud" alot of grassers simply lie in many cases, investigations annually cost more than the fraud itself.

"Grassers".

Are there really still people who think that way?

Well, obviously, there are. It's sad.

dippy3103

K0SS wrote: »

I am talking "benefit fraud" alot of grassers simply lie in many cases, investigations annually cost more than the fraud itself.

Some reports of fraud are inaccurate as either the informant is mistaken or the report was malicious.

And it's impossible to quantify the deterrent value.

BillJones

K0SS wrote: »

Read up on The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974.

Why, do you believe that it means that people can't refer to what you have done?

It does not take away the facts of your actions, and does not stop people inferring your character from that. Your posting suggests that you are hardly reformed, by the way, so I don't know why you are touchy about what you did.

dippy3103

K0SS wrote: »

Some? The vast majority are false, not even 1% are legit, frankly it's so small it falls within the error margin. Stop picking on the little man.]

I have no idea where you get 1% from. It's very very wrong

dktreesea

dippy3103 wrote: »

They should never suspend an award without evidence. I never have in over 20 years (yes I'm that old!!) and none of my colleagues would either. An anon allegation is not evidence

Yes, but doesn't an anonymous allegation impose an obligation ofn the fraud investiagation team to investigate? Maybe different councils/areas have different policies? When it comes to housing benefit, our council sometimes suspends the benefit temporarily until the allegation is investigated. I say sometimes because this doesn't always seem to be the case.

bll78

K0SS wrote: »

Some? The vast majority are false, not even 1% are legit, frankly it's so small it falls within the error margin. Stop picking on the little man.

You seem to have got yourself confused Koss the figures you quote are not anything to do with what your saying. 100% could be legit (although I'm sure they're not). What you have quoted is that there is believed to be 1% benefit fraud. If 1,000 get benefit, 10 are reported and all are committing fraud, then 100% are legit claims and 1% are committing fraud.

dktreesea

mro wrote: »

And this is based on what ?

Benefit myths & hysteria, media & Pr exercises or law.

Can you imagine everything stopping because of anonymous reports.

It would create chaos, people falling behind with rent, being threatened with eviction.

A lot of the time people whose housing benefit is stopped don't actually realise until it doesn't go into their account and they ring up the council to try to find out why it has been stopped.

A few years ago a friend of ours had her housing benefit stopped. Someone had anonymously alleged that her partner was living with her, which was laughable were it not such a serious situation for her financially, because she had wanted him to live with her and their sons for years but he didn't want to combine households. The council presumably investigated without her knowledge - I am guessing this involved sitting outside her house at various times of the day? And sure enough, on the days she worked nights, her partner would stay at her place with their children, then be leaving for work dropping their children off to school before she came back. So they wrote to her at that point, saying they were stopping her housing and council tax payment plus they sent her a demand for overpayment and said she would be interviewed under caution.

So she wanted to attend with her partner, but for some reason she couldn't take someone connected to the case along with her. Which was silly really as he could have explained his situation and cleared everything up. So I went with her. One thing one of the investigators said (there were two) stuck in my mind - when these kinds of allegations happen and the council then obtains enough evidence to convince them to suspend the claim and move forward, the onus of proof is on the claimant to prove the allegations wrong, not onthe council to prove the allegations.

In the end she got her claim reinstated and back paid, but what I also remember is her having to borrow money to pay the rent because the whole process, from when the claim was first suspended to when it was reinstated, took weeks.

And all because an anonymous person, probably one of her neighbours who barely knew her or her particular circumstances, took it upon him/herself to report her. Having gone through that experience, albeit as an observer, I would never report anyone, even if I was 99% sure they were taking the p1ss, because the 1% risk that I could be responsible for putting someone through the misery my friend went through just isn't worth it.

FBaby

From how you describe it, it doesn't sound like misery and that the council indeed had a good case to investigate. The fact she wanted him to move in back with her and that he didn't want to didn't mean in itself that they were not a couple from the definition used by the council. Surely the moment she was investigated, she knew there was a possibility that it would be stopped, so it couldn't have come as a huge surprised.

The way I see it is if you are going to be in a serious relationship with someone whilst claiming as a single parent, you are at risk of being reported, and I rather that very few are investigated wrongly with the risk of them having to borrow money for a couple of month to pay rent, than seeing someone milking the system for years because of not wanting to take that risk.

dippy3103

K0SS wrote: »

dippy3103 wrote: »

Read the links I provided, am not here to educate and spoon-feed you facts, are you mentally challenged or just dedicated to spreading ignorance on the internet?




Cite: Department for Work and Pensions, February 2012, Fraud and Error in the Benefit System: 2010/11 Estimates available at
http://statistics.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd2/fem/fem_apr10_mar11.pdf

Or, p30 Annual Fraud Indicator March 2012

And you are downright rude- I am neither mentally challenged nor spreading ignorance. Fortunately very little of my self esteem is tied up in your opinion of me.

Based on my 20 years experience as a benefit fraud investigator I can say that about 50% of anon calls turn out to be correct.

Still can't see where it says that only 1% of anon allegations turn out to be true?


Tell me, exactly what kind of "law student" are you?