Housing benefit interview under caution

NYM

Housing_Benefit_Officer wrote: »

The brother appears to have created a complete legal quagmire by adding his sisters name to the deeds of the property.

I think the brother will need to get advice from a Tax Advisor and quite possibly, a Solicitor too ...

FBaby

..and then explains himself to his wife!

FBaby

OP, you still haven't confirmed whether you are now a joint owner to the property or fully own the house. Some of your posts indicate the first and others the second.

northerntwo1

Does anyone else think it's unusual for a none mortgaged BTL - can't add OP to deeds if not on mortgage. I wonder if it was an inheritance that they both had access too and the rent was to pay the brother their share.

Errata

Sg1431 wrote: »

I have when I went to my interview before I left I told them that as I suffer from high depression and anxiety since this has happened I have struggled to cope with the kids so I am spending at lot of time at my parents so therefore can they cancel the claims from the date of the letter for when I realised what was happening

Which is a fair indication that you didn't need HB. The investigators are going to dig very deeply into the whole situation.

FBaby

The issue of being able to get on the deeds without being named on the mortgage was raised, but OP seems reluctant to clarify those queries. She did say that he was paying a mortgage.

iammumtoone

OP you say you dont want to get anyone else into trouble. I would not worry about this, it reads to me as if your brother has dropped you right in it!

I may be making assumptions but I guess you have never purchased a house, if this is the case I can well understand that you did not realise the implications of being on the deeds. However your brother who obviously has purchased more than one house would have known excatly what this means, he would most probably have also guessed it is not right to claim housing benefit for a house you part own, but as long as you were getting this he was guaranteed an income.

You seem to be the middle person here, you are in danger of getting prosecuted however haven't seen any of the benefits of this 'fraud'. Whatever the outcome is it likely you will have to pay the money back, this will be against your name but you never had it in the first place. Is your brother going to pay it back or allow the house to be sold to pay it back?

dippy3103

Well she has seen the benefits of fraud. She has a share in a house & also had her housing costs met.
As investigators they are obliged to cover all reasonable lines of enquiry under CPIA rules, hence looking at your bank statements.
You need a solcitor.

iammumtoone

dippy3103 wrote: »

Well she has seen the benefits of fraud. She has a share in a house & also had her housing costs met.

Not really she has a share in a house with her brother which is worthless until sold does the house even have any equity in it. Has the brother agreed to give her, her share if sold sounds to me this is just a paperwork exercise and he never intended her to actually make money out it it, she would probaly need the involment of a court case against her brother to get any profit from it.

She doesn't keep any of the hb money either.

I am not saying fraud hasn't been committed it has but in my opinion very cleverly by the brother he gets the benefit of it ie the hb money but the claim is not in his name.

Apart from a lot of hassle and expense to possibly get any money via a house sale I am not sure what the op has gained.

NYM

iammumtoone wrote: »

Not really she has a share in a house with her brother which is worthless until sold does the house even have any equity in it. Has the brother agreed to give her, her share if sold sounds to me this is just a paperwork exercise and he never intended her to actually make money out it it, she would probaly need the involment of a court case against her brother to get any profit from it.

She doesn't keep any of the hb money either.

I am not saying fraud hasn't been committed it has but in my opinion very cleverly by the brother he gets the benefit of it ie the hb money but the claim is not in his name.

Apart from a lot of hassle and expense to possibly get any money via a house sale I am not sure what the op has gained.

Her share isn't worthless. It's a valuable asset and she can easily borrow against it.

She may have paid that money over to her brother in payment for her share of the house. He may have been struggling financially and not able to raise any further capital from regular sources ?

The OP simply hasn't supplied enough information.

The only information she has supplied is that she was claiming HB on a property owned by her brother and that at some point, he transferred part ownership of that property to her.

To be allowed to claim HB on a property owned by a close relative, he/she would need to provide proof that she was paying rent on a commercial basis and all that such a tenancy conveys.

What we do know is that as soon as her name was added to the property deed, she no longer had any legitimate claim to Housing Benefit. She continued to claim for a further 4 years.




Attempting to read between the lines is pointless...