DWP forcing me to repay a debt caused by identity fraud

NedS

myDWPhell said:

Their communications are riddled with contradiction, inconsistencies and outright falsehoods.

All of which helps your case at tribunal.

Right, there are clearly two sides to this story, but like you said, they can't have it both ways. From what you've said they have put in writing to your MP, I'm guessing hopefully you can agree at tribunal that this is a fraudulent claim, accept that as such disclosing details may prejudice any ongoing investigation, and agree that DWP should cancel any debt recovery action and move forward with their fraud investigate in the interests of protecting the public purse. I would be inclined to present myself as the reasonable party and show some empathy for the position in which DWP find themselves not being able to disclose information to you due to an ongoing fraud investigation, which whilst it does involve a claim made in your name, does not directly involve you (easier said than done with the obvious levels of frustration you feel, but letting that frustration out at tribunal isn't going to help). They may argue they do not know it does not directly involve you until the investigation is complete, but this is your tribunal at which they should present some evidence to support their position.

If they are not willing to cancel the debt recovery action, then it is for them to provide some evidence at tribunal to support their position that the monies were paid to you (or to whom they were paid), which clearly it sounds like they are unable to do. Maybe you could request to the magistrate that they present details of the back accounts to the tribunal as closed evidence if that is possible. You don't need to see it, only the magistrate needs to see if it's an account in your name and confirm yes or no.

Rather than ranting at how incompetent DWP are (a tribunal isn't the place for this, ideally you need to gain some sympathy from the panel for your position), I would try to present the case as clearly as possible to the tribunal, empathising with DWP's position, but that clearly this fraud does not involve you, DWP can present no evidence that it involves you and that the tribunal should rule that any debt recovery actions against you should cease. You can highlight the inconsistencies in DWP's communications, the fact that they can provide no evidence directly linking you to the fraud, the fact you can provide evidence to show you were elsewhere on dates DWP claim you attended in person etc.

Spoonie_Turtle

NedS said:

myDWPhell said:

Their communications are riddled with contradiction, inconsistencies and outright falsehoods.

All of which helps your case at tribunal.

…

Rather than ranting at how incompetent DWP are (a tribunal isn't the place for this, ideally you need to gain some sympathy from the panel for your position),

And if it's any help, @myDWPhell, tribunals deal with cases arising from DWP incompetence every day so they already know!

Blancmang25

myDWPhell said:

In three letters to my MP this year, the DWP state:

"Mr XXXXX is adamant  he has not submitted a claim for UC, yet we have determined he has."

However, in those same 3 letters they go on to make the following statements:

“We have explained that providing further information* could prejudice an ongoing fraud investigation.”

“We have set up a dedicated team to investigate this specific type of fraud…”

“As there is fraud involvement, we are unable to disclose the information* to Mr XXXXX as it may prejudice the investigation.”

Make up your mind DWP - it can't be both! Either I submitted the claim (which I did not), or it's fraud!

*The DWP reference to providing/disclosing information to me regards my multiple requests by phone, email and in SARs to be provided with details of the claims - so that I could defend myself during the DWPs internal MR process. Information I was NEVER provided with and NEVER received until after their final judgement in their MRN. The information I had desperately been asking to be provided with for 4 months was eventually delivered to me as an appendix to their MRN - their final judgement in their own internal appeals process. #DWP - Kangaroo Court/Mob Justice!

Their communications are riddled with contradiction, inconsistencies and outright falsehoods.

DWP - Not fit for purpose!

I have quickly read through all the comments in your post and all have been very helpful from everyone.
Just a couple of things:

Have you fully checked your credit history on Experian etc and have you raised your Identity Fraud with Action Fraud, I have put the link below for further information:

https://www.experian.co.uk/consumer/identity/what-to-do-if-victim.html

With regards to your SAR's requests to the DWP. I fully understand your anger and the position that you find yourself in and it is extremely stressful, but the DWP have to abide by the GDPR and cannot give out personal information if it is(I know you have a case of ID fraud) not yours.

Obviously the person who has used your details is more than likely at another address/area. 

Please do not be offended by the next part of my post.

You have stated a fraud investigation has been commenced, you have not said how long ago you received this information, so I am presuming this is still ongoing and that you have not received any correspondence from the fraud department?

The fraud department can fully investigate what has been happening with the UC claims that have been made using your details, so whilst this is stressful and I fully understand, in a way a fraud investigation is a good thing for you.

The fraud team should be able to ascertain any irregularities in any claims for UC using your details.

myDWPhell

NedS said:

myDWPhell said:

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!

Yes, Jobcentres outsource security, and they would be responsible for the CCTV footage (speak to the security guard). I would guess it is overwritten after a short period of time (maybe a week or month), so doubt you will have any success there given the time that has passed.

I would try to gain proof of your whereabouts on the days/times in question of the appointments. If you can get signed time sheets from your employer showing you were in work, and any evidence (credit card receipts maybe) of the day you were 300 miles away. You can use that to discredit DWPs assertion that it was you.

DWP are correct that they do not retain copies of passport etc, but the system will show what ID was seen (e.g, passport) and will document any relevant reference numbers (e.g, passport number). They may not have seen any physical ID and may have verified ID by asking biographical questions (things you should know) which again I think you can use to discredit DWP at tribunal (what physical ID did you actually see to verify my alleged claim? Oh, none?)

Hopefully you will have a clearer picture once DWP present their evidence bundle to the tribunal and you get sight of that (and make sure you have sufficient time to gather any evidence you need to dispute).

There were three alleged face-to-face appointments. For one of them as I said I was 300 miles away. I’d gone home for a week and was staying with my father. I have train tickets, credit card transactions, witness statements and I even have a live WhatsApp location for the very day which is particularly useful. As for one of the other days as I’ve previously said, I was in work all day and I have a letter from work to prove I was there all day. My job isn’t the sort of job you can leave and no one would notice. If I wasn’t there for 5 minutes it would be noticed. Added to that the location of the alleged appointment was some 60 miles from where I live and work. As for the third day, I have no proof of my whereabouts but I submitted a SAR to my mobile provider to request my geo-location data for the day in question. Whilst they can’t provide me with the information due to GDPR reasons they have said that they would provide it via a court order so should the tribunal wish it would be able to request this. 

As for the ID verification that’s great advice regarding any associated reference numbers. Definitely something to bear in mind. Also regarding ID, notes on the JC system show that there were some kind of issue or problem when it came to the answering of the biographical questions at some point but I don’t know much more than that. I’d visited a job centre in my own local area in order to speak to someone face-to-face. The agent I spoke with clearly understood the predicament I was in. He kindly provided me with some information he was able to access including the “issues with the biographical questions” information. Unfortunately, he was reprimanded at a later date for sharing the information with me. 

When it comes to the CCTV footage and asking the security guard. Unfortunately, the job centre in question is some 60 miles from where I live so not very practical. 

DWP - Not fit for purpose! 

myDWPhell

NedS said:

myDWPhell said:

Their communications are riddled with contradiction, inconsistencies and outright falsehoods.

All of which helps your case at tribunal.

Right, there are clearly two sides to this story, but like you said, they can't have it both ways. From what you've said they have put in writing to your MP, I'm guessing hopefully you can agree at tribunal that this is a fraudulent claim, accept that as such disclosing details may prejudice any ongoing investigation, and agree that DWP should cancel any debt recovery action and move forward with their fraud investigate in the interests of protecting the public purse. I would be inclined to present myself as the reasonable party and show some empathy for the position in which DWP find themselves not being able to disclose information to you due to an ongoing fraud investigation, which whilst it does involve a claim made in your name, does not directly involve you (easier said than done with the obvious levels of frustration you feel, but letting that frustration out at tribunal isn't going to help). They may argue they do not know it does not directly involve you until the investigation is complete, but this is your tribunal at which they should present some evidence to support their position.

If they are not willing to cancel the debt recovery action, then it is for them to provide some evidence at tribunal to support their position that the monies were paid to you (or to whom they were paid), which clearly it sounds like they are unable to do. Maybe you could request to the magistrate that they present details of the back accounts to the tribunal as closed evidence if that is possible. You don't need to see it, only the magistrate needs to see if it's an account in your name and confirm yes or no.

Rather than ranting at how incompetent DWP are (a tribunal isn't the place for this, ideally you need to gain some sympathy from the panel for your position), I would try to present the case as clearly as possible to the tribunal, empathising with DWP's position, but that clearly this fraud does not involve you, DWP can present no evidence that it involves you and that the tribunal should rule that any debt recovery actions against you should cease. You can highlight the inconsistencies in DWP's communications, the fact that they can provide no evidence directly linking you to the fraud, the fact you can provide evidence to show you were elsewhere on dates DWP claim you attended in person etc.

Whilst I genuinely appreciate your input. Some of which has been very useful and constructive indeed. I’d never considered it but I’ll be submitting a copy of my passport as further evidence to the Tribunal tomorrow. When it comes to there being two sides to this I have to disagree. I have never, NEVER, submitted a claim for Universal Credit - ever! Nor have a been party to the submission of any such claim or conspired in any such claim. There are only two factors in this case. Firstly, the submission of a fraudulent claim and secondly, to some degree, negligence and a failure to follow proper procedures on the part of the DWP. 

As for the statements, they were indeed in a letter to my MP. If the DWP would change their decision then I would of course agree that this is a case of fraud and allow them to move forward with a fraud investigation. That’s what I’ve been asking for since October 2024. And of course in that situation I would no longer seek to be provided with information. However, they cannot continue to fail to change their decision, continue to insist that I am responsible whilst simultaneously stating that it’s fraud and not providing me with information. Although, as of the date of their MRN I was subsequently provided with the information I requested. Although, “a little bit late” springs to mind. 

Come the Tribunal, should it get that far then of course I would present myself as the reasonable party, a Tribunal is definitely not the place for “ranting”. Any empathy for the DWP would be minimal and tactical. I would certainly hold back how I really feel about them. The Tribunal would be a calm and measured presentation of the facts and an opportunity to challenge, counter and refute any of their allegations. Your suggestion of requesting the magistrate that they present details of the bank account is a very good idea and one I shall  definitely be taking note of. 

I do genuinely appreciate your input and suggestions. The passport I shall action tomorrow and the submission of the bank details as closed evidence is definitely one I’ll keep in mind. 

As for “ranting”. As I said, I wholeheartedly agree that the Tribunal is no place for ranting. I’ll save my ranting for here. What the DWP have done to me and put me through is unconscionable. I read a post today from someone who was in exactly the same position as me. She commented, “This isn't my !!!!!! up, it is theirs, and I shouldn't have to spend my limited time sorting out their mess, so what am I feasibly expected to do?” Also, I came across a Guardian article titled, “Stop hounding victims of universal credit fraud, DWP told”. I also spoke with someone recently who had faced exactly the same situation as I am. He commented on the devastating impact on his mental health which had resulted from his experience with the DWP and the fact that they just don’t care. 

Thanks once again for your advice. 

DWP - Not fit for purpose?

myDWPhell

Murphybear said:

myDWPhell said:

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!

Thanks for that.  Sadly the DWP at its worst is very very bad🙀

I had a slight issue with the DWP, with an ESA claim,  just before I retired in 2014.  They did apologise and gave me £50 compensation😃

Hopefully you will get some compensation as well.  If they don’t offer any maybe your MP could bully them into it.  

Yes, I believe there’s a structure in place that governs their compensation process. For now I just have to concentrate on getting them to change their decision or a successful Tribunal outcome. But absolutely, in these cases compensation is a must. The time I’ve lost to this is immense and the impact on my wellbeing is immeasurable. Thank you

DWP - not fit for purpose! 

myDWPhell

Spoonie_Turtle said:

NedS said:

myDWPhell said:

Their communications are riddled with contradiction, inconsistencies and outright falsehoods.

All of which helps your case at tribunal.

…

Rather than ranting at how incompetent DWP are (a tribunal isn't the place for this, ideally you need to gain some sympathy from the panel for your position),

And if it's any help, @myDWPhell, tribunals deal with cases arising from DWP incompetence every day so they already know!

That wouldn’t surprise me. The level of their incompetence is truly staggering. Its unparalleled. Thanks, it’s a comforting thought  

DWP - Not fit for purpose! 

myDWPhell

Hi Blancmang25

Here’s my response:

Thanks for your input.

”Have you fully checked your credit history on Experian etc and have you raised your Identity Fraud with Action Fraud, I have put the link below for further information:”

Yes to both. I’ve subscribed to Experian and downloaded my full credit report, there was nothing of any concern in there. Although, I’m now thinking I should look through it again on a forensic level. I also submitted it as part of an evidence submission to the Tribunal. Along with it I submitted statements for all current accounts I had that were open and active on the alleged payment date. 

I reported my case to Police ActionFraud and have continued to update my report and submit new information as it comes to light. 

As regards my SARs I fully appreciate that the DWP have to abide by GDPR requirements. At the same time their continued insistence that I am responsible for the claims alongside their justifications for not providing me with the information requested via my SARs in more than frustrating. I’ve continued to reach out to the DWP throughout the process, I’d be  more than happy to work with them. That however is not how they operate. 

When it comes to the address that the fraudulent claimant used. “He”, I’ll call him he, submitted 3 claims within a 6 week period. The first 2 lapsed or closed because “he” failed to attend the initial verification applications. He did go on to attend the third ID verification appointment for the third and final claim. The strange thing is each of the 3 claims were submitted with entirely different addresses in entirety different parts of the country. Given that very suspicious history to the claim I just don’t understand how the DWP would pay an advance out on it. It had more red flags than a …. Red Flag shop! 🚩 

As regards the fraud investigation. I initially reported fraud in October 2024 on discovering the DEA. At that point they suspended recovery action and commenced their initial fraud investigation. I called a couple of times for an update but was told there was no update available. My only contact with the fraud team was a brief telephone interview with very standard questions. I eventually heard back from them in March 2025 where they informed me that they hadn’t changed their decision! I was genuinely in a state of shock. As I’ve explained in previous replies at that point I immediately applied for the Mandatory Reconsideration. As I’ve also mentioned previously the MR process was a total farce. I received no written explanation and no information or details whatsoever regarding the details of the allegations - none! All I was aware of was the dates of two of the claims. I later found out via a letter to my MP that “face-to-face” appointment had been attended, allegedly by me. They didn’t provide any information regarding the location or date of this “appointment”. Obviously, not knowing any details of the allegations made it impossible for me to submit any information or evidence during the MR process. But as it turns out they hadn’t even submitted my MR until three months after I’d requested it. The MR was eventually sent on June 27 (a Friday) and by July 3 they sent me their MRN informing me that once again they hadn’t changed their mind. I had no contact with the DWP at all during the few days that my MR was being processed. 

DWP - Not fit for purpose! 

myDWPhell

Blancmang25 said:

myDWPhell said:

In three letters to my MP this year, the DWP state:

"Mr XXXXX is adamant  he has not submitted a claim for UC, yet we have determined he has."

However, in those same 3 letters they go on to make the following statements:

“We have explained that providing further information* could prejudice an ongoing fraud investigation.”

“We have set up a dedicated team to investigate this specific type of fraud…”

“As there is fraud involvement, we are unable to disclose the information* to Mr XXXXX as it may prejudice the investigation.”

Make up your mind DWP - it can't be both! Either I submitted the claim (which I did not), or it's fraud!

*The DWP reference to providing/disclosing information to me regards my multiple requests by phone, email and in SARs to be provided with details of the claims - so that I could defend myself during the DWPs internal MR process. Information I was NEVER provided with and NEVER received until after their final judgement in their MRN. The information I had desperately been asking to be provided with for 4 months was eventually delivered to me as an appendix to their MRN - their final judgement in their own internal appeals process. #DWP - Kangaroo Court/Mob Justice!

Their communications are riddled with contradiction, inconsistencies and outright falsehoods.

DWP - Not fit for purpose!

I have quickly read through all the comments in your post and all have been very helpful from everyone.
Just a couple of things:

Have you fully checked your credit history on Experian etc and have you raised your Identity Fraud with Action Fraud, I have put the  below for further information:


With regards to your SAR's requests to the DWP. I fully understand your anger and the position that you find yourself in and it is extremely stressful, but the DWP have to abide by the GDPR and cannot give out personal information if it is(I know you have a case of ID fraud) not yours.

Obviously the person who has used your details is more than likely at another address/area. 

Please do not be offended by the next part of my post.

You have stated a fraud investigation has been commenced, you have not said how long ago you received this information, so I am presuming this is still ongoing and that you have not received any correspondence from the fraud department?

The fraud department can fully investigate what has been happening with the UC claims that have been made using your details, so whilst this is stressful and I fully understand, in a way a fraud investigation is a good thing for you.

The fraud team should be able to ascertain any irregularities in any claims for UC using your details.

Hi Blancmang25,

For some reason I couldn’t respond directly to your message so I’ve replied via a separate comment. 

huckster

How were these fraudulent claims made? 

If online then presumably, the Internet ID address details of the person making the claim would be recorded by DWP.

I have come across cases, where it was someone living at the address of the fraud victim or using their Wifi connection, that was behind the fraud and had access to all of the information including ID documents. And of course if DWP were looking at Internet ID addresses used, it would look like the alleged fraud victim had made benefit claim, took out advances etc.