Housing benefit interview under caution

rogerblack

Errata wrote: »

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

Sure they can.
They own (half?) a house.
To add to my response in the duplicate thread - criminal prosecution not only risks jail - but if the OP escapes that - then the courts can do 'recovery of criminal assets' procedures - so in addition to having a civil debt against them from the DWP to recover the overpayment - the courts can directly recover assets - including from forced sale of the house.
This is _NOT_ taken off the money owing to the DWP, and in some cases, the amount recovered can legally exceed the amount overpaid - in addition to still having to repay the DWP.

Transferring ownership of the house before this may also lead to contempt of court proceedings, or the recovery of assets from the brother.

Sg1431

I do understand everyone's points of view as it does seem extremely dodgy and after reading info online now I see that I was in the wrong but my worry is that they will see this as fraud rather than a mistake

Errata

Twice after this someone from the council came out to make sure my claim was right and no one mentioned anything.

You've had two opportunities to advise that your brother had put you on the deeds of the property you rent. You didn't.
Saying you didn't know what the implication of being put on the deeds meant when you could have easily looked it up on the internet is pretty far fetched and unbelievable.

Poppie68

I have no idea how the process of adding names to property Deeds works but I would imagine it involves the new addition to sign paperwork and maybe a solicitor being present and finances questioned, which in turn would lead to the subject of hb????

rogerblack

Sg1431 wrote: »

I do understand everyone's points of view as it does seem extremely dodgy and after reading info online now I see that I was in the wrong but my worry is that they will see this as fraud rather than a mistake

That is quite possible.
The outcome if that happens could be _VERY_ severe, up to and including prison and forced sale with confiscation of most or all the value of the house.
You need an actual lawyer experienced in benefit law.

They must understand housing benefit law, overpayments and such.

FBaby

Sg1431 wrote: »

I do understand everyone's points of view as it does seem extremely dodgy and after reading info online now I see that I was in the wrong but my worry is that they will see this as fraud rather than a mistake

The problem is that those who do commit fraud will always use the excuse of it being a mistake so whether it really is or not is impossible to confirm and to be fair, not realising the implication of becoming an owner on HB entitlement after 4 years is quite hard to believe.

dodger1

Sg1431 wrote: »

I do understand everyone's points of view as it does seem extremely dodgy and after reading info online now I see that I was in the wrong but my worry is that they will see this as fraud rather than a mistake

Even if they see it as fraud, prison is still rare. Fraud or a mistake I'd imagine you'll still have to pay back all the HB received over the period, that's what I'd be concentrating on.

Majority of benefit cheats not prosecuted, official figures show

New figures show that 35,000 benefit cheats escaped prosecution last year, and the year before only five per cent of those convicted faced jail

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10515091/Majority-of-benefit-cheats-not-prosecuted-official-figures-show.html

sh0597

I would have thought it unlikely to be seen as fraud if there is little gain to be had.


Only a legal person would know.

tomtontom

sh0597 wrote: »

I would have thought it unlikely to be seen as fraud if there is little gain to be had.


Only a legal person would know.

Four years of HB payments is quite a gain?

Caz3121

tomtontom wrote: »

Four years of HB payments is quite a gain?

and it all went to OPs brother - I wonder when it comes to the repayment, the brother will return the money received from the OP (although he should have already paid tax on much of it)