We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Possible Benefit Fraud
Comments
-
lol another laughable thread0
-
I would also like to just say, having worked for the DWP, that a huge amount of this so called 'fraud' is, actually, official error but, obviously, for the Daily Mail brigade, it makes much more sense to call it 'fraud' lol :doh: Figures are juggled and manipulated to a laughable level.
Then, since the government decided to get rid of so many [STRIKE]higher paid, experienced[/STRIKE] elderly staff, and take on [STRIKE]lower paid fools[/STRIKE] young, dynamic staff, the situation has got much worse......:whistle:
Lin
You can tell a lot about a woman by her hands..........for instance, if they are placed around your throat, she's probably slightly upset.0 -
I would also like to just say, having worked for the DWP, that a huge amount of this so called 'fraud' is, actually, official error but, obviously, for the Daily Mail brigade, it makes much more sense to call it 'fraud' lol :doh: Figures are juggled and manipulated to a laughable level.
Then, since the government decided to get rid of so many [STRIKE]higher paid, experienced[/STRIKE] elderly staff, and take on [STRIKE]lower paid fools[/STRIKE] young, dynamic staff, the situation has got much worse......:whistle:
Lin
As a fraud investigator I can add to that. Since review periods were got rid of the amount of customer error has shot up (ie overpayments arising from people not reporting changes not because of deliberate fraudulent intent but because they simply think it's not relevant - eg when your child leaves school & maybe doesn't start work but you lose the applicable amount for them). The benefit system is complex and people do make genuine mistakes- there is also a clear distinction between fraud & customer error.0 -
As a fraud investigator I can add to that. Since review periods were got rid of the amount of customer error has shot up (ie overpayments arising from people not reporting changes not because of deliberate fraudulent intent but because they simply think it's not relevant - eg when your child leaves school & maybe doesn't start work but you lose the applicable amount for them). The benefit system is complex and people do make genuine mistakes- there is also a clear distinction between fraud & customer error.
I would say 45% of working Housing Benefit claimants are being overpaid and 20% underpaid because of failure to declare changes of circumstances such as changing jobs, wages increasing and changes in household circumstances etc. Most non pension credit pensioners fail to declare the annual increase in their private pension or changes in their capital.
About 5 to 10% of benefit claimants never bother to return their review forms or have a change of circumstances such as a partner moving in or wages increasing the week they receive the review form and ask for their claim being cancelled.
In the mid 1990s one local authority I worked for did Land Registry Searches for every private rented claimant over about 24 months and caught about 40 home owners claiming to be tenants. Another local authority did land registry searches for every new private rented claimant and weeded out fraudulent claimants before they were even paid.
Getting rid of the yearly review was a bonkers idea by the previous Labour Government.
I would also add about a third of overpayments created were due to Local Authority Error but they represented 2 or 3% of claimants that were overpaid.
The average overpayment would be about £500 and probably 1 or 2% of claimants overpaid would be prosecuted or called in for an interview under caution to be slapped with a penalty.These are my own views and you should seek advice from your local Benefits Department or CAB.0 -
There's also a good possibility that the female is visiting for genuine reasons. I could give 2 examples where there were genuine reasons for someone of opposite gender visiting, one relates to me & the other a former neighbour.
The one relating to me was that after my now hubby & I got engaged, we were living opposite ends of the town we lived in with the not safe at night town centre between us. I moved in with him so we could be together then got a small one bed flat 5 minutes walk from his place. I told the benefits office that I would be at my fiance's house each evening to which they said that they couldn't stop me visiting. Also the flat I had was next to a pub which had late licence so Friday, Saturday & Sunday, I would be sleeping at his place due to the noise from the pub, benefits office said that was OK. I think the reason it was allowed was due to me being honest & there being good reason for me staying at my then fiance's house at the weekend.
The second example was after we had been married a couple of years, we moved to Local Authority housing. Our then next door neighbour and her partner seperated with neighbour's ex moving out but he carried on visiting each evening to see the kids. Housing Benefit tried to stop this trying to say they were still together. Our neighbour went to a solicitor who wrote to Housing Benefit saying that under various legislation, think one was kids had right to see their Father, they couldn't stop the ex partner visiting to see the kids. I suspect someone reported him visiting. My husband & I said at the time that if the person investigating had knocked on our door, we'd have said the ex was only visiting & didn't stay overnight.
To give another, it could be a carer going in. There's not many males doing home care. It could also be a female family member going in to care for him.
I wouldn't report a situation like OP has described in case there were genuine reasons for the female visiting.0 -
Housing_Benefit_Officer wrote: »I would say 45% of working Housing Benefit claimants are being overpaid and 20% underpaid because of failure to declare changes of circumstances such as changing jobs, wages increasing and changes in household circumstances etc. Most non pension credit pensioners fail to declare the annual increase in their private pension or changes in their capital.
About 5 to 10% of benefit claimants never bother to return their review forms or have a change of circumstances such as a partner moving in or wages increasing the week they receive the review form and ask for their claim being cancelled.
In the mid 1990s one local authority I worked for did Land Registry Searches for every private rented claimant over about 24 months and caught about 40 home owners claiming to be tenants. Another local authority did land registry searches for every new private rented claimant and weeded out fraudulent claimants before they were even paid.
Getting rid of the yearly review was a bonkers idea by the previous Labour Government.
I would also add about a third of overpayments created were due to Local Authority Error but they represented 2 or 3% of claimants that were overpaid.
The average overpayment would be about £500 and probably 1 or 2% of claimants overpaid would be prosecuted or called in for an interview under caution to be slapped with a penalty.
Agree completely. I really don't see what's so onerous about asking working age people to confirm that their circumstances remain as last stated in writing once every six months. Doesn't even need to be a full review- maybe ask them to return a slip saying they have read the award letter and it's accurate.
I have never assessed but I know how long it does take to go back and make multiple adjustments over potentially years. Bringing back reviews will slash fraud and error (be it clm't, LA or DWP it's still costing the tax payer).0 -
There's also a good possibility that the female is visiting for genuine reasons. I could give 2 examples where there were genuine reasons for someone of opposite gender visiting, one relates to me & the other a former neighbour.
The one relating to me was that after my now hubby & I got engaged, we were living opposite ends of the town we lived in with the not safe at night town centre between us. I moved in with him so we could be together then got a small one bed flat 5 minutes walk from his place. I told the benefits office that I would be at my fiance's house each evening to which they said that they couldn't stop me visiting. Also the flat I had was next to a pub which had late licence so Friday, Saturday & Sunday, I would be sleeping at his place due to the noise from the pub, benefits office said that was OK. I think the reason it was allowed was due to me being honest & there being good reason for me staying at my then fiance's house at the weekend.
The second example was after we had been married a couple of years, we moved to Local Authority housing. Our then next door neighbour and her partner seperated with neighbour's ex moving out but he carried on visiting each evening to see the kids. Housing Benefit tried to stop this trying to say they were still together. Our neighbour went to a solicitor who wrote to Housing Benefit saying that under various legislation, think one was kids had right to see their Father, they couldn't stop the ex partner visiting to see the kids. I suspect someone reported him visiting. My husband & I said at the time that if the person investigating had knocked on our door, we'd have said the ex was only visiting & didn't stay overnight.
To give another, it could be a carer going in. There's not many males doing home care. It could also be a female family member going in to care for him.
I wouldn't report a situation like OP has described in case there were genuine reasons for the female visiting.
But the whole point of an investigation is to establish the facts and if there is fraud. Yes, often there is a good explanation. I accept it's probably not nice being called in to see an investigator, but we are not monsters!!0 -
Yes you should report. It's the fraud investigation services to gather the evidence to prove or disprove the allegation. Just because somebody has been reported it doesn't follow that their benefit will be suspended.
.I for one do not object to paying towards helping to support people that are in genuine need but it sticks in my throat that I work hard to pay for the greedy.
Sorry but that was not my experience, my Son was on sickness benefit when some spiteful person wrongly informed that he was working, His benefit WAS immediately suspended and it took them 6 weeks to investigate and re enstate it when proved wrong.
Those six weeks were a nightmare as I am on person credit and found it almost impossible to feed myself, him and cater for his kids at weekends.
I would never unless absolutely sure report anyone.Slimming World at target0 -
Sorry but that was not my experience, my Son was on sickness benefit when some spiteful person wrongly informed that he was working, His benefit WAS immediately suspended and it took them 6 weeks to investigate and re enstate it when proved wrong.
Those six weeks were a nightmare as I am on person credit and found it almost impossible to feed myself, him and cater for his kids at weekends.
I would never unless absolutely sure report anyone.
They should never suspend an award without evidence. I never have in over 20 years (yes I'm that old!!) and none of my colleagues would either. An anon allegation is not evidence0 -
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.6K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.9K Spending & Discounts
- 244.6K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.2K Life & Family
- 258.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards