Hiding assets

shorty33

I have recently acted as the executor for a relative's estate. The sole beneficiary happens to be on benefits. They have asked someone to "hide" money for them in an account until they reach retirement and are no longer getting means tested benefits. I have explained their position to them, regarding fraud and deprivation of assets though it doesn't seem to be making an impact. What I am not clear on is the position of the person hiding the money, would they be classed as complicit in the fraud and liable for prosecution?

bsms1147

shorty33 wrote: »

What I am not clear on is the position of the person hiding the money, would they be classed as complicit in the fraud and liable for prosecution?

Hopefully yes.

marliepanda

It wouldnt be complicit in fraud, it would BE fraud, as executor you are responsible.

So they wouldnt be in trouble, you would. You are the one hiding it.

Give them the money. Unless you want yourself in trouble, do the job.

shorty33

I am not hiding it. The money would be dispersed as per the will. It is up to the beneficiary to decide what they do with it afterwards.

antrobus

shorty33 wrote: »

I have recently acted as the executor for a relative's estate. The sole beneficiary happens to be on benefits. They have asked someone to "hide" money for them in an account until they reach retirement and are no longer getting means tested benefits. I have explained their position to them, regarding fraud and deprivation of assets though it doesn't seem to be making an impact.....

Perhaps you should have pointed out to them that a will is a matter of public record. I think it all goes into the National Probate Calendar for one thing. The DWP aren't completely stupid.

shorty33 wrote: »

...What I am not clear on is the position of the person hiding the money, would they be classed as complicit in the fraud and liable for prosecution?

Conspiracy to defraud remains a crime.

If I was the OP I would seriously consider taking legal advice on the matter. As in making sure that none of this comes back to bite me at any point in the future.

P.S. The cost of such advice can, of course, be charged as an expense to the estate. The sole beneficiary has placed the executor in this position, so it's only fair that they pay the price.

antrobus

marliepanda wrote: »

It wouldnt be complicit in fraud, it would BE fraud, as executor you are responsible.

So they wouldnt be in trouble, you would. You are the one hiding it.

Give them the money. Unless you want yourself in trouble, do the job.

That's why I would suggest that the OP take legal advice.

As in, if the beneficiary requests that I transfer the sum that they are due into an account in the name of a third party am I obliged to follow that instruction? Should the instruction be in writing? What should I do if I know that this instruction has been made as part of a conspiracy to defraud the public revenue? Etc and so forth.

(Although the simplest thing to do would be to transfer the money as requested and then inform the DWP.)

Voyager2002

Note that if the money is transferred as requested, it becomes the property of the third party.

Under normal circumstances, there is nothing to stop someone giving away money that they inherit but do not need. However, when someone receives means-tested benefits special rules apply: their benefit is re-calculated when their financial situation changes, and even if they give money away they may be treated as still having it for benefit purposes (Deprivation of Capital rules).

There is nothing fraudulent about any of this, so long as the beneficiary ensures that DWP (or whichever Department is paying benefit) is kept informed.

Mojisola

shorty33 wrote: »

I am not hiding it. The money would be dispersed as per the will. It is up to the beneficiary to decide what they do with it afterwards.

You sort out the estate and send a cheque to person named in the will (not to someone else).

The DWP will have a copy of the will and they will check the names against their database so there is no way the beneficiary can hide this money.

Mojisola

shorty33 wrote: »

They have asked someone to "hide" money for them in an account until they reach retirement and are no longer getting means tested benefits.

Voyager2002 wrote: »

There is nothing fraudulent about any of this, so long as the beneficiary ensures that DWP (or whichever Department is paying benefit) is kept informed.

What is proposed here is straightforward fraud.

dippy3103

shorty33 wrote: »

I have recently acted as the executor for a relative's estate. The sole beneficiary happens to be on benefits. They have asked someone to "hide" money for them in an account until they reach retirement and are no longer getting means tested benefits. I have explained their position to them, regarding fraud and deprivation of assets though it doesn't seem to be making an impact. What I am not clear on is the position of the person hiding the money, would they be classed as complicit in the fraud and liable for prosecution?

Yes. It's an offence under the Social Security acts to knowingly allow, cause or permit a third party to fail to report a change in circumstances. If convicted on inditement it carries a maximum of 7 years.

shorty33

Thanks dippy, I think armed with this I should be able to persuade both parties to think again.