False References - Help

Malthusian

I wouldn't. What are they supposed to do with that information? The same as the OP, i.e. nothing.

Although it is fraud, they didn't obtain a pecuniary advantage of three months' salary by supplying false references. They obtained three months' salary because their employer wasn't monitoring whether they were actually doing anything. It's not illegal to collect a salary for doing nothing, otherwise we'd have to build 50 new prisons.

xapprenticex

Just do better in future, you have learned a lesson. You was just too trusting, and in this day and age, that is dangerous and nobody will have much sympathy for you.

asajj

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5547894

Similar issue and answers really. You say you want to move on but not sure if it is true

I appreciate you feel cheated but take it up as a lesson and draw a plan about recruiting & managing people in the future.

dacouch

asajj wrote: »

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5547894

Similar issue and answers really. You say you want to move on but not sure if it is true

I appreciate you feel cheated but take it up as a lesson and draw a plan about recruiting & managing people in the future.

Remarkable that a recruitment agency would not properly check references...

Pound

littlespectacles wrote: »

I did some digging after they left and it turns out that the reference emails they provided where just two email addresses they made up in the names of their old bosses.

So, presumably they gave you an email address which anyone could register (e.g. hotmail). In which case I don't think you've been very thorough in your reference checking and are partly to blame. Next time insist on a business email address.

asajj

Pound wrote: »

So, presumably they gave you an email address which anyone could register (e.g. hotmail). In which case I don't think you've been very thorough in your reference checking and are partly to blame. Next time insist on a business email address.

Or a phone number!

sangie595

Undervalued wrote: »

I assume that is a typo and you meant criminal!

In which case I disagree that this is not a criminal offence. Technically it could well be although, as I said earlier, getting anything done about it is another matter!

The employee apparently responded to email reference requests about himself having claimed, falsely, that he had worked for these non existent companies. Or, worse, deliberately gave false email addresses for real people / companies and impersonated them by replying.

Either could be an attempt to obtain a pecuniary advantage (i.e. a job) by deception which is now incorporated into the crime of fraud.

Sorry yes I did. I was in hospital at the time, and whilst my typing can be atrocious at least my computer doesn't decide for itself what word I meant! But I don't agree that there was any loss or gain as outlined in the Act. The OP paid them for the work they did - the fact they didn't do any was down to the OP's failure to supervise them. The reference itself may have got them the job yes, but there was no financial gain in that fact alone. It was the work they didn't do that caused the "loss", an action purely resulting from inadequate supervision; and which could have equally occurred if the references had been legit.

Interesting though that I got a warning from the forum team for calling someone a liar for doing the same thing! Twice!

Undervalued

Pound wrote: »

So, presumably they gave you an email address which anyone could register (e.g. hotmail). In which case I don't think you've been very thorough in your reference checking and are partly to blame. Next time insist on a business email address.

Given that you can register a domain name for around ten quid, it is all too easy for somebody to get one very similar to the business's real address. For example if the business is johnsmith dot co dot uk all they need to do is register something like johnsmith dot org or johnsmith dot biz etc.

These are just very basic examples, with a bit more subtly it is very easy to create a totally fictitious history. Employers really do need to take care and check thing properly

sangie595

Undervalued wrote: »

Employers really do need to take care and check thing properly

I think that if an employer is going to use references for any degree of dependability in this day and age, then they need to become much more "personal" about such things. In the case that I spoke of before, the poster admitted that they had been dismissed with due cause and would have a relative provide untrue references to cover this up, and it was the second consecutive time they had done this. When I said they were a "practiced liar" the forum team decided to call that an insult, as opposed to what it was - a statement of truth. We live in a society where people now think that lying to cover up their employment history, specifically, their recent employment history, is acceptable. We routinely have people just on this board who have "been travelling", "looking after sick relatives" or whatever the most convenient lie is. And we even have some people advising others to lie!

In a digital age it is possible to forge just about anything. I'm not even very good at computers - in that I use a limited range of programmes that do what I need them to do - and if I wished I could forge some impressive credentials and references.

Employers need to consider that if they think references worthwhile, these are the first investment that they make in a potential employee. They need to check the most recent employer reference - do addresses match? Is the person providing the reference actually the manager / HR department or whoever they are supposed to be? Pick up the phone, don't depend on the written word. If they say that they have taken a career break, or there are recent gaps in employment, check out the facts provided.

If they have been travelling, a passport should support this; they have to have stayed somewhere; and supported themselves in some way - even if they have lived off savings, bank statements show withdrawals etc., in in the locations they occur. So if the last two years were in Timbuctoo, the ATM withdrawals will show that. Photographs (and who doesn't take photographs?) contain metadata that can be easily retrieved to show when they were taken. If they have been caring for someone, then there are also records of that. Doctors, care workers and social services will know who carers are.

Of course this is all a lot of faffing around, although for the majority of people, a quick phone call to the previous company and their line manager can resolve any questions. But if all this is too much trouble, then there is absolutely no point in taking up references at all. So employers may as well not bother. Or if they do, and those references turn out to be false, then they have no cause to complain. I am personally not a huge fan of references in any case, and in my area of work it is rare that a candidate isn't known to us in some way. But the employer does ask for references, so I always follow up the successful candidates references with a phone call, and I neveruse the phone number provided. I go through the employers switchboard to be connected to the person named, or find their number from an independent source.