Housing benefit interview under caution

Housing_Benefit_Officer

Colin_Hunt wrote: »

Can you do that ? Just sign away a house/asset ? And then, presumably, go on to claim benefits.

He could but...

1) We would still treat him as owning the house as he has deprived himself of ownership to claim benefits.

2) You can't claim HB for 5 years if you previously owned the home.

So basically he is stuffed whatever he does.

zugzwang

Colin_Hunt wrote: »

Can you do that ? Just sign away a house/asset ? And then, presumably, go on to claim benefits.

No, it doesn't work like that. I was just suggesting a way to pay back the HB- return the property to her brother and he can remortgage. I presume property is unmortgaged, or he wouldn't have been able to sign it away to OP as mortgage company would've objected.

Anyway, main point is the OP didn't get more benefits when the house was signed to her.

Instead the problem is she lost her right to claim HB. So it's an odd fraud because fraud is unlawful gain and she didn't stand to gain from HB by house transfer.

OP has gained a house though-no mention joint ownership I think-"was renting a house that my brother owned".

But reason why they did this isn't clear to me. I was speculating that her brother might have other motives, because I think it's suspicious that he chose to sign away the house instead of using a will, and doing so while he was having marital problems. But signing asserts away to hide them doesn't work. Alternatively, he may have done so for tax reasons or something.

However, I doubt either of them acted purely with intention to defraud HB, because they didnt stand to gain benefits from signing it over.

[Deleted User]

I don't think the OP was deliberately defrauding HB.., I do wonder why the brother didn't just leave the house in his will to the OP (seems a bit strange). But intentional or not, it was fraud as the OP has had some ownership of the house for four years. I think the OP probably blinded themselves to possible outcomes. Secure house and the brother's mortgage gets paid. Everyone benefits.., until someone in housing finds out. It also brings into question whether the OP had any right to HB under contrived tenancy rules. The OP should have been asking questions four years ago really.

I doubt the OP is facing prison.., it could happen, but its not a definite (I'd think it was not the likeliest outcome.., but that's just my opinion). But I don't have a doubt the OP will have to pay four years HB back, and won't get anymore. How will the rent be paid?

This is when 'winners' become losers.

allen35

merlin68 wrote: »

I agree a prison sentence looks likely.

Tut tut tut, not quite sure who you agree with, none of the posters with a vast knowledge of experience have mentioned a prison sentence.

Even IF it did go to court it's highly unlikely as the OP has admitted her mistake and sounds like she wants to make it good (may need help from her brother now and not when he passes away) and didn't benefit from any type of possible fraud.

Typical example of ignorance of the rules.

dearlouise

Could the courts force the sale of the home OP now half owns? To repay they 4 years of HB he has claimed...?

That might be something to think about.

FBaby

i also have a degree of sympathy for the OP, as it seems they were unaware that being added to the deeds meant they were also part owner of the property.

I don't believe this for a second. They knew very well that it made them owner to the property since that was the rationale behind the exercise in the first place so the sister had no claim to it any longer.

It is quite common sense that you can't claim HB for a property you own and live in, otherwise, I can imagine a lot of people reducing their hours of work so they could claim it as with tax credit and HB they would without a doubt be no worse off then working full-time!

FBaby

What is not clear is whether OP's name was added in addition to brother or whether his took his name out to put OP's name on. If the latter, I am quite surprised as I thought you couldn't put a different name on the deeds to that of who is paying the mortgage, but I don't understand what would have been the benefit of just adding OP name as as long as the brother's name is still on it, his wife still has a claim to it and therefore could still take both OP and brother to court for a sale, especially if she could convince the judge that OP's name was added on the deeds as a way to deprive her of her entitlement.

All very dodgy.

dippy3103

Paying it back will not prevent further action - repayment is always without prejudice to further proceedings.

Nobody can say prison is highly likely without full knowledge of the facts- ie amount involved, antecedents and so on. Ultimately prison is a disposal open to the courts if the o/p Is prosecuted and convicted.

I would also point out that the o/p failed to report the very relevant fact that they were now joint owner of the property to the council.

I would suggest the o/p consults a solicitor ahead of the interview

merlin68

Actually this was quoted by housing benefit officer. My advice would be to get a good solicitor in the hope you avoid a prison sentence if you are prosecuted for your fraud.It wasnt me making it up. Prison sentences are used more often now as a deterrent.

Errata

I suspect the possibility of someone on HB being able to afford a solicitor is nil.