DWP forcing me to repay a debt caused by identity fraud

myDWPhell

Murphybear said:

I’m sorry to hear of the problems you have had with the DWP.

is there any way of proving the bank account the money went into is not yours?  

Hi MurphyBear,

Funny you should ask! That has become a massive issue. The DWP have repeatedly claimed that the “advance” was paid into a bank account belonging to me. In their letter to my MP of April this year they state:

“On XX September 202X, an advance of £XXX.xx was requested and approved.

The advance was paid into an account belonging to Mr XXXXXX”

Despite repeatedly requesting information regarding the details of the bank account the advance was paid into I was either told that, they didn’t have that information or due to data protection they weren’t able to provide the information.

On 12/07/25 I submitted a Subject Access Request. In my SAR I stated:

“Regarding a Universal Credit claim made in my name on XX September 202X and a new claim advance of £XXX.xx approved on XX September 202X and paid on XX September 202X. I request the following information regarding the bank account the advance was paid into:

Name of bank

Account holders name

Sort code

Account number”

 

The DWPs response dated 24/07/25 to my SAR of 12/07/25 stated:

 

“Your request has been forwarded to the relevant Business Unit within DWP to action, they will send the information directly to you.

 

This is because the information required does not fall under the

RAR guidelines; therefore; your Right of Access Request case with DWP will now be closed and the Business Unit within DWP are dealing with your request.”

 

It’s now 13/09/25 and as of yet I haven’t received a response. I’ve asked my MPs office to contact the DWP escalate this for me – I’m still waiting.

In my tribunal application I submitted a copy of my Experian Credit Report alongside copies of my statements for all my bank accounts that were open/active on the date of the alleged payment. They clearly show that no such payment entered any of my bank accounts.

Thanks for your response.

DWP – Not fit for purpose!

NedS

myDWPhell said:

NedS said:

myDWPhell said:

rosewalk said:

I would advise you to seek specialist support if you haven't done so. I would contact your local Citizens Advice or similar advice organisation in your area. I would also advise you to contact your MP. 

Thanks, as previously stated my MP is on the case. My case currently sits with the Tribunal.

That will be your opportunity to highlight DWP's failings and present your case to the independent tribunal. DWP will also be able to present their evidence of why they consider it likely that you did make the claim.

Have you been advised that any evidence bundle DWP submit prior to the tribunal will be passed to you? They are normally required to submit their evidence bundle within a set time period (30 days?) of you filing an appeal. If DWP fail to respond on time (a common failure), I would be urging the clerk to ask the magistrate to dismiss the appeal in your favour as any further delay is prejudicial. 

I would be phoning the clerk to the court at HMCTS regularly to gain a good understanding of the tribunal process and to make sure you are copied anything that DWP have submitted and are going to rely on at tribunal, so you have prior sight and can prepare yourself accordingly. Be prepared.

Hi NedS, 

Thanks for your feed back and advice. I've been in regular contact with the clerks at HMCTS.

As regards the DWP evidence bundle, they haven't yet submitted anything as of yet. I submitted my Tribunal application alongside my initial evidence submissions on 01/08/25. I immediately received a message via the HMCTS portal  informing me:

"Latest update

We've told DWP that you've appealed against their decision. They should respond before 29 August 2025. We'll contact you and explain the next steps when they've replied."

It's now 13/09/25 and they haven't yet responded. When I called a few days ago the HMCTS clerk advised that I give them until 19/09/25 - apparently they have a "backlog". I was advised if by then I hadn't received a response the HMCTS Legal Officer would issue the DWP with a direction to respond. 

I would keep pushing the Clerk on this point, in a very polite but firm way, and keep making the point that any further delay is prejudicial. Keep things moving forward and keep pointing out that further delays are detrimental/harmful to you.

DWP are notorious for taking way longer than required to respond (8 months in the case of my own tribunal before lapsing the appeal in my favour). I'm not sure what action the magistrate has available to them if DWP fail to respond to their direction. I'm not sure if they can kick the case in your favour, or if the appeal has to be heard before they can make a ruling. The Clerk may be able to advise you on this.

DWP backlogs are not your concern (although HMCTS backlogs may reasonably affect you), and although the magistrate will want to give DWP every reasonable opportunity to respond, DWP backlogs are not a reason for the magistrate to make unreasonable dispensation to your detriment.

NedS

myDWPhell said:

In my case prior to the MRN the DWP failed to provide me with ANY of the details of their allegation. The only information they provided me with was the dates that two UC claims had been submitted (in my name) and later they informed me (via my MP) that a face-to-face appointment was attended (allegedly by me) - but they didn't provide the date or location of this "appointment". That added to the fact they refused to provide me with a "written explanation" (my entitlement to which was laid out their DR letter) made it completely impossible for me to submit any information during the MR process. The MR process was supposed to be my opportunity to provide information or evidence that I was not responsible for the claims but as they refused to make me aware of any details of the allegations that became mission impossible. I went as far as submitting a Subject Access Request on 30/04/25. I requested to be provided with:

“All information regarding Universal Credit claims made in my name”

Their response of 02/06/25 stated:

“The personal information you requested contains information about another individual. The Data Protection Act 2018 states that the following must be taken into account when deciding to disclose this information:

    - the type of information which would be disclosed

    -  duty of confidentiality to the other individual

In these circumstances a decision has been made, in line with legislation not to disclose third party information.”

You just couldn't make it up!!!

I wonder who this other individual is? Maybe it was a joint claim with a partner, or maybe this is their admission that this other individual is the fraudulent claimant who is not you. Maybe a point you could argue at tribunal to catch them off guard that by their actions they are acknowledging the claimant isn't you? Creating a bit of confusion and doubt about this point can't hurt you.

That's really good advice. I hadn't considered. Although, in some ways I want them to issue a "change of decision". I also want an apology and retraction.

You won't get an apology. DWP lapsing the appeal in your favour would be a retraction, and a win at appeal is vindication for you.

Good luck with the ICE. The terms brick wall and head spring to mind, but don't let me deter you, although I would focus my energy on the tribunal for now as I think that is where you are most likely to receive an outcome.

Maybe you can make more specific SARs asking for specific individual pieces of information. Do DWP have video footage of the person who attended an appointment? What ID was used to verify their identity when making the claim. What ID procedure was used to verify the claimant identity when the claim was made. Was ID verified before the advance payment was issued? Was primary photographic ID used (driving licence, passport), and were these properly recorded? If not, how did they verify identity. If DWP have failed to follow their procedures when verifying identity when the claim was initially made, this strengthens your case.

For example, something like:

Please provide all information directly relating to the ID verification process used and evidence of ID recorded for myself for the claim for UC made in my name in 2023

Please provide information held about any 'Advance' payments of UC issued in 2023 including the account name, sort code and last four digits of the bank accounts to which these payments were made, and what ID checks were performed before these payments were made including any evidence of ID seen or recorded.

myDWPhell

In the DWP DR letter, in the, “If you disagree with a decision” section. It also stated: 

“You can also ask us to reconsider a decision

Tell us if you have more information, or if you think we have overlooked something which might change the decision. Do this within one month of the date on this letter.

We will look at what you tell us and send you a letter to tell you what we have decided, and why. We call this letter a Mandatory Reconsideration Notice.” 

This is the DWPs Mandatory Reconsideration process. It’s part of their initial internal appeals process. It’s supposed an opportunity to challenge and refute their claims and allegations and to provide information and evidence in your defence.

Their DR letter was dated the 13th, I received it on the 17th and submitted my MR request on the 17th. Indeed in a letter to my MP in April the DWP stated:

Mr XXXXX requested a MR on 17 March 2025. We will write to him with our decision in due course.

By June and having received no response or contact from the DWP regarding my MR request I asked my MPs office to contact the DWP and request information regarding my MR. I also asked my MPs office to highlight the fact that I hadn’t been provided with a copy of the written explanation or any of the details of their allegations. I asked them to stress that without this information I would not be able to provide any information or evidence to refute their allegations – as I was completely unaware of the details of the allegations. I emphasised that without this information and opportunity to provide evidence to the contrary my concern was that the DWP would reach the same conclusion.

During a phone call I received from the DWP complaints team (02/07/25) I was informed that due to an administrative error my MR request had not been submitted - despite the DWPs letter (April) saying it had! The DWP agent in the Complaints Department informed me that it had been submitted on 27/06/25.

In a letter to my MP in August of this year from the DWP it states: 

“We explained in our last response to you we had passed Mr XXXXX case for a mandatory reconsideration (MR), and he would hear in due course. Regrettably there was an error when the agent processed the request for a MR which resulted in it not being sent.

We sent Mr XXXXX case for a MR on 27 June 2025. We looked at his case again on 3 July 2025 and have not changed our decision. The evidence showed significant links between the UC claim submitted on XX September 202X and Mr XXXXX.” 

As for the “significant links”, I had never been provided with ANY of the details of their allegations or these “significant links”.

Having failed to “send” my MR when it was initially submitted, despite their letter of April claiming it had been. They then “sent” my request on 27/06/25 and by 03/07/25 they’d found the time to process and fully investigate my MR and report back that they had not changed their decision. They managed to do all of this without contacting me or providing me with any of the details of their allegations or subsequently giving me the opportunity to challenge and refute their allegations.

#DWP – Kangaroo Court/Mob Justice

DWP – Not fit for purpose!

myDWPhell

NedS said:

myDWPhell said:

NedS said:

myDWPhell said:

rosewalk said:

I would advise you to seek specialist support if you haven't done so. I would contact your local Citizens Advice or similar advice organisation in your area. I would also advise you to contact your MP. 

Thanks, as previously stated my MP is on the case. My case currently sits with the Tribunal.

That will be your opportunity to highlight DWP's failings and present your case to the independent tribunal. DWP will also be able to present their evidence of why they consider it likely that you did make the claim.

Have you been advised that any evidence bundle DWP submit prior to the tribunal will be passed to you? They are normally required to submit their evidence bundle within a set time period (30 days?) of you filing an appeal. If DWP fail to respond on time (a common failure), I would be urging the clerk to ask the magistrate to dismiss the appeal in your favour as any further delay is prejudicial. 

I would be phoning the clerk to the court at HMCTS regularly to gain a good understanding of the tribunal process and to make sure you are copied anything that DWP have submitted and are going to rely on at tribunal, so you have prior sight and can prepare yourself accordingly. Be prepared.

Hi NedS, 

Thanks for your feed back and advice. I've been in regular contact with the clerks at HMCTS.

As regards the DWP evidence bundle, they haven't yet submitted anything as of yet. I submitted my Tribunal application alongside my initial evidence submissions on 01/08/25. I immediately received a message via the HMCTS portal  informing me:

"Latest update

We've told DWP that you've appealed against their decision. They should respond before 29 August 2025. We'll contact you and explain the next steps when they've replied."

It's now 13/09/25 and they haven't yet responded. When I called a few days ago the HMCTS clerk advised that I give them until 19/09/25 - apparently they have a "backlog". I was advised if by then I hadn't received a response the HMCTS Legal Officer would issue the DWP with a direction to respond. 

I would keep pushing the Clerk on this point, in a very polite but firm way, and keep making the point that any further delay is prejudicial. Keep things moving forward and keep pointing out that further delays are detrimental/harmful to you.

DWP are notorious for taking way longer than required to respond (8 months in the case of my own tribunal before lapsing the appeal in my favour). I'm not sure what action the magistrate has available to them if DWP fail to respond to their direction. I'm not sure if they can kick the case in your favour, or if the appeal has to be heard before they can make a ruling. The Clerk may be able to advise you on this.

DWP backlogs are not your concern (although HMCTS backlogs may reasonably affect you), and although the magistrate will want to give DWP every reasonable opportunity to respond, DWP backlogs are not a reason for the magistrate to make unreasonable dispensation to your detriment.

8 months! That’s incredible. I keep checking the HMCTS portal on a daily basis expecting the status to change at any point.

I’m not actually entirely sure that it’s the Clerk I’ve been speak to. When you said Clerk I just presumed that’s also who I’ve been speaking with. I’ve just googled the number that I was provided with at it’s the “First-tier Tribunal (Social Security and Child Support”. They are part of the “Social Entitlement Chamber”. I’m not sure but I have a feeling they’re not clerks. The telephone number I was provided with is associated with the following link:

...........................*

Again, I’m not sure but I think my case won’t be formally submitted to the Tribunal proper until the DWP submit their response – as I said, I’m unsure on this.

Thanks for the tip on delays being, prejudicial, detrimental and harmful – that’s definitely something to bear in mind.

Any thoughts on whether or not it's the clerk or not I've been speak with would be appreciated.

I've managed to get a bit of media attention so hopefully that helps. I know they've been in touch with the DWP for comment. One major UK paper has already written the article and it's due for publication. Another major title is also on the case. I'm hoping it all helps.

*Turns out I can't post links! - "You have to be around for a little while longer before you can post links."

It's a gov, site - if you Google 0300 123 1142 it takes you there

DWP - Not fit for purpose!

myDWPhell

NedS said:

myDWPhell said:

In my case prior to the MRN the DWP failed to provide me with ANY of the details of their allegation. The only information they provided me with was the dates that two UC claims had been submitted (in my name) and later they informed me (via my MP) that a face-to-face appointment was attended (allegedly by me) - but they didn't provide the date or location of this "appointment". That added to the fact they refused to provide me with a "written explanation" (my entitlement to which was laid out their DR letter) made it completely impossible for me to submit any information during the MR process. The MR process was supposed to be my opportunity to provide information or evidence that I was not responsible for the claims but as they refused to make me aware of any details of the allegations that became mission impossible. I went as far as submitting a Subject Access Request on 30/04/25. I requested to be provided with:

“All information regarding Universal Credit claims made in my name”

Their response of 02/06/25 stated:

“The personal information you requested contains information about another individual. The Data Protection Act 2018 states that the following must be taken into account when deciding to disclose this information:

    - the type of information which would be disclosed

    -  duty of confidentiality to the other individual

In these circumstances a decision has been made, in line with legislation not to disclose third party information.”

You just couldn't make it up!!!

I wonder who this other individual is? Maybe it was a joint claim with a partner, or maybe this is their admission that this other individual is the fraudulent claimant who is not you. Maybe a point you could argue at tribunal to catch them off guard that by their actions they are acknowledging the claimant isn't you? Creating a bit of confusion and doubt about this point can't hurt you.

That's really good advice. I hadn't considered. Although, in some ways I want them to issue a "change of decision". I also want an apology and retraction.

You won't get an apology. DWP lapsing the appeal in your favour would be a retraction, and a win at appeal is vindication for you.

Good luck with the ICE. The terms brick wall and head spring to mind, but don't let me deter you, although I would focus my energy on the tribunal for now as I think that is where you are most likely to receive an outcome.

Maybe you can make more specific SARs asking for specific individual pieces of information. Do DWP have video footage of the person who attended an appointment? What ID was used to verify their identity when making the claim. What ID procedure was used to verify the claimant identity when the claim was made. Was ID verified before the advance payment was issued? Was primary photographic ID used (driving licence, passport), and were these properly recorded? If not, how did they verify identity. If DWP have failed to follow their procedures when verifying identity when the claim was initially made, this strengthens your case.

For example, something like:

Please provide all information directly relating to the ID verification process used and evidence of ID recorded for myself for the claim for UC made in my name in 2023

Please provide information held about any 'Advance' payments of UC issued in 2023 including the account name, sort code and last four digits of the bank accounts to which these payments were made, and what ID checks were performed before these payments were made including any evidence of ID seen or recorded.

As for the “other individual”. Following their response to my SAR of 30/04/25 in which they denied my request I submitted an appeal. Their letter denying my request outlined my entitlement to ask them to reconsider their decision. I submitted my appeal by letter and email on 11/06/25 and as of yet I’ve received no response. I followed up my appeal email and letter with a further letter and also asked my MPs office to contact the DWP regarding this – still no response!

When it comes to an apology, I did read a feature on the South West London Law Centres website entitled, “DWP issues apology to victim of universal credit fraud after the Law Centre takes on her case.” I intend on pursuing this.

That’s disappointing to hear your experience off ICE, I was hoping that might be somewhere I might get a hearing.

As regards my SARs, I’ve definitely tightened them up. I’m incredibly specific no and try to leave them no wriggle room. However, even the SAR I referenced earlier where I asked for “All information…”  That was just the opening paragraph, I went onto be much more specific yet still they declined my request. It was notable that they denied my request flat out and provided me with zero information – absolutely nothing. Surely some of the most basic details could have been provided or even a redacted version. But to provide NOTHING seems very odd – the claim is allegedly in my name after all.

As an appendix to their MRN (their final judgement in their internal appeals process) the DWP did eventually furnish me with a comprehensive breakdown of all the details of their allegations – a bit late! It’s like putting someone on trial and only telling them the nature of the allegations after they’ve been held as guilty. It’s unconscionable, it really is. I’d been going around in circles trying to get hold of this information since March and when to they provide it? In July alongside their final judgement! At least I have it now. This has allowed me to submit a really water tight submission to the Tribunal. For example when it comes to the alleged face-to-face appointments. For one of them I was in work all day, and the other one I was over 300 miles away. The MRN appendix also details their ID verification process.  As for CCTV. I did also submit an SAR for that although I couldn’t be specific because I wasn’t aware of the alleged location. In their response they stated:

“Regarding your request for a copy of a CCTV recording.

DWP is not the data controller for the personal information held on

CCTV footage. You will need to contact the building landlord or the company responsible for the security of the building. The contact details of the data controller can be found on the signage accompanying the CCTV cameras.

Please note CCTV footage is only retained for a limited period of time.”

I spoke with an agent in a local JC who told me they only keep the footage for a short period of time and they would no longer have it. On reflection, now that I know the location of the alleged face-to-face appointments I should probably still make the effort to contact them. As regards the ID documentation, I was told that because of GDPR the DWP do not retain copies.

I have already submitted a very specific SAR for details of the bank account the advance was paid into. I submitted this in mind July – I’m still waiting.

It’s like some type of twisted Matrix like mind game.

 

DWP – Not fit for purpose!