# Help! - Being investigated for benefit fraud!



## Psychonaut (Aug 10, 2005)

------------------------


----------



## blamblam (Aug 10, 2005)

This might be of help maybe?

From http://libcom.org/organise/personal



> How to deal with accusations of benefit fraud:
> 
> The Government spends hundreds of thousands of pounds talking about this but actually has little success prosecuting alleged fraudsters. It is important to remember that receiving benefits you are not entitled to does not automatically make you guilty. Overpayments of benefits can be caused through official error and claimant error and may not actually be classifiable as fraudulent.
> 
> ...


----------



## laptop (Aug 10, 2005)

Off the top of my head - and I have a bottle of wine to declare, ossifer - I'd say your biggest risk was not having been "available for work" due to the amount of time you must have spent at the bookies'. 

I have no idea what accounting rules they'd apply to any income from the bookies. In your position I'd be going to the Citizens' Advice or for a free half-hour consultation with a solicitor with some experience of benefit issues, like *now*.


----------



## i_hate_beckham (Aug 10, 2005)

I had an investigative officer round today over some work i did last year, it was only 2 days and was a trial which the handbook says i can do without my benifits being affected but apparently this is wrong. I can't afford to lose any benifits until my inheritence comes through which might be a couple of months.


----------



## Psychonaut (Aug 10, 2005)

> This might be of help maybe?
> 
> From http://libcom.org/organise/personal


Cheers fir that, i should've demanded a copy of the statement, but i dont think it'll matter too much as im claiming ignorance and theres nothing there they wont find out out anyway. 

almost forgot

e) Does anyone have a spare debit-card to rent?


----------



## Psychonaut (Aug 10, 2005)

laptop said:
			
		

> Off the top of my head - and I have a bottle of wine to declare, ossifer - I'd say your biggest risk was not having been "available for work" due to the amount of time you must have spent at the bookies'.
> 
> I have no idea what accounting rules they'd apply to any income from the bookies. In your position I'd be going to the Citizens' Advice or for a free half-hour consultation with a solicitor with some experience of benefit issues, like *now*.



Luckily (!)  its disability benefits. She suggested that someone might claim if im able to win money i cant be _that_ disabled, i said i just follow others advice so its completely unskilled. This also means the time spent is very low, as i dont have to run my own systems etc. 

 Perhaps i should seek advice - the tone of the meeting was like an informal warning, but you never know  -could be one of their tricks.


----------



## Psychonaut (Aug 10, 2005)

i_hate_beckham said:
			
		

> I had an investigative officer round today over some work i did last year, it was only 2 days and was a trial which the handbook says i can do without my benifits being affected but apparently this is wrong. I can't afford to lose any benifits until my inheritence comes through which might be a couple of months.



just a thought - was the handbook you saw out of date or just plain wrong? Might make some sort of difference. Perhaps you should see CAB too?


----------



## i_hate_beckham (Aug 10, 2005)

Just plain wrong it seems but i will appeal because it did say i could work a paid trial. It was the offical booklet all JSA claimers are given.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Aug 10, 2005)

You really do need to get some independent advice on this - it's simply too difficult, and potentially detrimental to your case, to try to begin to advise you on this situation via a website. Your local law centre should be able to help it if there is one locally - check this link  and you can see a button on the right hand side to find out locations. Otherwise, local Citizens Advice Bureau might be able to help you, or another local advice centre. Presuming your legally aidable due to benefit income, you could look at the CLS Direct website  to find your nearest advice agency that can help you for free.

Having said I can't advise you, I would point out the following. Compliance officers will usually be quite pleasant - they want you to like them so that you'll be more honest. You should be very very careful about signing anything else without getting proper advice in the meantime, as you could prejudice your case to a fatal degree. (1) The reason they want your bank statements are to investigate how much money you've had in them, simple as. (2) Yes, they may ask for details of your accounts, because if you have a positive balance, i.e. money won previously, this counts as capital also. (3) I don't know of the top of my head and I haven't got the time to check. (4) Most fraud allegations to DWP and ilk are made anonymously, that's how most fraudulent claims are discovered. Like it or not, if you claim benefits, you're under an obligation to play by the system's rules and sometimes this will impact upon you negatively - instead of worrying about getting "this bitch somehow by the book", i suggest that you worry about your own situation cos it doesn't matter who or why, what matters is your income and capital and how it affects your benefit claim.

Finally, you say that you have £000's in unclaimed DLA - if this is true, you are being an unnecessary martyr to an undefined cause. DLA is a benefit that anyone can get, whether in work or not, whether with millions in the bank or nothing at all, so I suggest you also ask your advisor to assist you with making a DLA claim asap (and before you ask, no, you won't get backdating cos you need to make the claim otherwise there is no entitlement). 

Good luck.


----------



## butterfly child (Aug 10, 2005)

You're not allowed to gamble whilst on benefit?

I'm finding this all very mind boggling.. do they say you can't smoke or drink on them either?!

Fucking madness.


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 10, 2005)

butterfly child said:
			
		

> You're not allowed to gamble whilst on benefit?
> 
> I'm finding this all very mind boggling.. do they say you can't smoke or drink on them either?!
> 
> Fucking madness.




That's what I thought


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Aug 10, 2005)

butterfly child said:
			
		

> You're not allowed to gamble whilst on benefit?
> 
> I'm finding this all very mind boggling.. do they say you can't smoke or drink on them either?!
> 
> Fucking madness.


Er, gambling produces (or _may_ produce) income, the other two do not.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Aug 10, 2005)

butterfly child said:
			
		

> You're not allowed to gamble whilst on benefit?
> 
> I'm finding this all very mind boggling.. do they say you can't smoke or drink on them either?!
> 
> Fucking madness.



No, the position isn't that you can't gamble on benefits, that why i wrote that Psychonaut shouldn't sign anymore statements cos I don't understand the relation there. 

BUT, if as a result of gambling on, say, a lucky 15 bet that comes up with 4 winners at 100/1, you're going to win ££££s, well in excess of the capital limits for means tested benefits such as income support, jobseekers allowance, housing benefit, etc. Plus, as has been mentioned, if you're on JSA, you're meant to be actively seeking work, so there could be questions asked if you were stuck in a bookies all day presumably. It's complicated, hence my advice to seek advice.


----------



## Thora_v1 (Aug 10, 2005)

I'd definitely get yourself down to the CAB if I was you.


----------



## shoddysolutions (Aug 10, 2005)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Er, gambling produces (or _may_ produce) income, the other two do not.



Not in my experience.   

All it generates is misery IMO.

Of course, Psychonaut, your experience might be different. I hope you get this situation sorted.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Aug 10, 2005)

It's horribly complicated and it's crucial to ask somebody who actually knows the answer rather than guessing. It has a lot to do with whether you're carrying out work with an _expectation_ of receiving income. I had a similar situation where I was writing while claiming benefits about a decade ago. I don't think it made a difference if you just wrote some articles and sent them in to magazines on spec - it _did_ matter if you were writing them having already agreed payment for your work, and it _did_ matter if you had them accepted and got paid.

Note too that that's just the _income_ side of it. There's also the availability for work / how many hours you're working side.


----------



## subversplat (Aug 10, 2005)

laptop said:
			
		

> Off the top of my head - and I have a bottle of wine to declare, ossifer - I'd say your biggest risk was not having been "available for work" due to the amount of time you must have spent at the bookies'.


You only need to be "available for work" for the things on your jobseeker's agree ment which generally reads "I will contact 1 employer a week by post, two by phone and ask my friends every other week" - all in all about 20 minutes work a week


----------



## tobyjug (Aug 10, 2005)

Stating the bleeding obvious if you were a professional gambler it is hardly likely you would be claiming the pea-nuts that passes for benefit in Britain.
Professional gamblers are very rare animals anyway.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Aug 10, 2005)

subversplat said:
			
		

> You only need to be "available for work" for the things on your jobseeker's agree ment which generally reads "I will contact 1 employer a week by post, two by phone and ask my friends every other week" - all in all about 20 minutes work a week



sorry mate but that's not quite right - what you're referring to is the "actively seeking work" aspect of jsa, not the "availability for work" aspect - they are quite different concepts and idle speculation of this sort is precisely why people end up getting into awkward situations (e.g. "well my mate down the pub told me that as long as the work i do is unpaid, it won't affect my benefits")

If Psychonaut is claiming jsa, and the dwp decided that s/he hasn't been available for work in the recent past cos of gambling commitments, that could be a problem. The issues you raise are also pertinent, but as you note, the steps someone is taking to seek work are in their jobseekers agreement and are effectively checked every time they sign. 

Anyways, i think this is all a bit of a red herring tbh - the real problem is Psyhonaut's overall capital i.e. savings/bank accounts/gambling accounts. *It is crucial to get some independent advice from a reputable source in fraud investigations.*


----------



## Psychonaut (Aug 10, 2005)

No, im not claiming JSA.  I get DLA, Income Support & housing benefit.

I have to go back next week with bank statements. She says i will be intervieved again and be asked to sign another statement. possible overpayment was mentioned. I could stall the meeting if necessary, but i dont suppose theres much point.

 If my capital  is over the  Income support threshold, and i lose a few quid per week, so be it - thats fair enough. I just hope it isnt backdated, cos that could really sting  - shes only asking for a few months worth of bank statements?  

If they do add up all the winning bets, and claim that as income, then i am truly fucked. I dont and never have had that amount. 

 CAB is closed today, but ill definately be going tomorrow. Ill also phone some local solicitors from Paulies links. Thanks everyone for all the advice.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Aug 10, 2005)

Psychonaut said:
			
		

> The compliance officer seemed genuinely friendly and supportive, even after the probing ?s & mind games.  I signed a statement saying that I was unaware I wasn’t allowed to gamble on benefits and would stop.



Have the DWP made this 'gambling clause' obvious to claimants ? How does the DWP view claimants who spend a £1 every week playing the Lottery, maybe only losing or winning the odd tenner or so, and if a small win occurs, should that be declared as income or what? As far as I can see, there is no information given to benefits claimants which talks about gambling/lotteries.


----------



## geminisnake (Aug 10, 2005)

butterfly child said:
			
		

> You're not allowed to gamble whilst on benefit?



It's not that you're not allowed to gamble, as others have said it's you've got to inform the BA of any wins. 
I have a vague recollection that they updated the regulations around the time the lottery started and you're meant to tell them about any wins from that, bingo, bookies, etc. Especially if they are over (I think) £3,000, and even if it's only £10, though you are allowed to earn £10 a week afaik.

They'll be checking your bank statements to see your income and see whether they will be taking action.
It does seem to be out of order that they don't take your losses into consideration, but I guess that'll be coz they don't care about your outgoings just your incomings coz then they can bump you off IS.


----------



## geminisnake (Aug 10, 2005)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> Have the DWP made this 'gambling clause' obvious to claimants ?  As far as I can see, there is no information given to benefits claimants which talks about gambling/lotteries.



I definetly remember reading it, possibly in my benefits book before they did away with them.
Dunno where it would be now.


----------



## JWH (Aug 10, 2005)

Forget about pursuing a vendetta against whoever you think informed on you: you'd have to prove it was malicious AND untrue.


----------



## jacobs steel (Aug 10, 2005)

Psychonaut said:
			
		

> snip



Any tips for the footie?


----------



## past caring (Aug 11, 2005)




----------



## Psychonaut (Aug 11, 2005)

Sorry, no footie. how about some Golf - 

USPGA - Outright Winner

V.Singh 2pts e/w  @ 7/1
R.Goosen 1pt e/w @ 16/1
K.Perry 1pt e/w @ 33/1
D.Toms 1/2pt  e/w @ 40/1

'Rest-of-World' Winner

R.Goosen 1pt e/w @ 7/1


----------



## jacobs steel (Aug 11, 2005)

Paulie Tandoori said:
			
		

> BUT, if as a result of gambling on, say, a lucky 15 bet that comes up with 4 winners at 100/1, you're going to win ££££s, well in excess of the capital limits for means tested benefits such as income support, jobseekers allowance, housing benefit, etc. Plus, as has been mentioned, if you're on JSA, you're meant to be actively seeking work, so there could be questions asked if you were stuck in a bookies all day presumably. It's complicated, hence my advice to seek advice.



Would this bet affect my csa contributions in any way?


----------



## butterfly child (Aug 12, 2005)

Do people really put winnings into their bank accounts then?

Surely you'd take it home and put it in the biscuit barrel, or under the mattress??

You wouldn't put it in a bank, they'd try to pay bills with it!!


----------



## likesfish (Aug 14, 2005)

if you've got cash coming in and going out near the capital limits about £3000 
your going to have a hard time explaining where the cash is coming from  
 sounds to me like the Dss may consider you as self employed


----------



## tobyjug (Aug 14, 2005)

likesfish said:
			
		

> if you've got cash coming in and going out near the capital limits about £3000
> your going to have a hard time explaining where the cash is coming from
> sounds to me like the Dss may consider you as self employed




I thought that £3000 limit had been radically altered upwards in recent budgets.


----------



## likesfish (Aug 14, 2005)

with DLA poss capital limit is £7000 but don't quote me on that.
 but if thers a lot of cash going in and out each month there going to say hang on a moment your basically running a buisness


----------



## Psychonaut (Aug 14, 2005)

DLA is non-means tested afaik. IS/housing benefit capital limits goes up to 6K, but unfortunately i dont think it comes into effect until april 2006.

 A criminal lawyer i spoke to on the phone says i dont have to go to any interviews or show them anything at all, because its still informal and im not 'under caution'. They also suggested that it is quite a 'sneaky' underhand tactic that this wasnt made clear to me. Because its informal i cant take a proper legal representative along with me (unless i cough up myself). 

 the benefits lawyer i spoke to said at first he'd come with me, even though it wasnt under caution, but later said he couldnt do anything for me, yet, because no action has been taken. 

Its up to the manager of the compliance dept how far they want to take this. Everything about the tone of the last meeting suggested they would err on the (relatively) lenient side, so i think my best bet is to play ball and throw myself at their mercy. 

I will be very guarded about signing anything more than a standard 'i will be prosecuted if these statements are forged/ i realise i may have to make good overpayment'.  

If they've been playing me all along and it does gets nasty, it might be better if they _do_ claim im running a business. That way they might have to acknoledge losing bets, money paid for information etc.  My so-called 'profit' will be decimated.  Thats not legal advice, just something that occurred to me reading likefish's post.


----------



## tobyjug (Aug 14, 2005)

Psychonaut said:
			
		

> Because its informal i cant take a proper legal representative along with me (unless i cough up myself).



You have an absolute legal right to take a "friend" along to witness ANY official interview you have with officialdom of any kind, including when an employer calls you in for a bollocking.
On reflection I am suprised they are asking you to bring in bank statements as if they have much in the way of evidence of benefit fraud they could have seen them without asking you.


----------



## stuff_it (Aug 16, 2005)

apparently if you don't apply for at least 4 crisis loans a year you can get investigated on the basis that no one can survive on benefits alone....


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Aug 16, 2005)

Psychonaut said:
			
		

> Sorry, no footie. how about some Golf -
> 
> USPGA - Outright Winner
> 
> ...


Mickelsen


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 16, 2005)

stuff_it said:
			
		

> apparently if you don't apply for at least 4 crisis loans a year you can get investigated on the basis that no one can survive on benefits alone....




I thought there was a limit on the number you could have a year? And you can't apply for a second one til the first is paid off - and since they're deducted in miniscule weekly amounts that takes forever (I should know, I'm still paying off one from last year!)


----------



## RaverDrew (Aug 16, 2005)

stuff_it said:
			
		

> apparently if you don't apply for at least 4 crisis loans a year you can get investigated on the basis that no one can survive on benefits alone....



That sounds a bit iffy to me


----------



## subversplat (Aug 16, 2005)

Maddalene said:
			
		

> I thought there was a limit on the number you could have a year? And you can't apply for a second one til the first is paid off - and since they're deducted in miniscule weekly amounts that takes forever (I should know, I'm still paying off one from last year!)


You can apply for a new crisis loan every day of the year, if you want, they just might not be accepted. The idea that you have to pay the first one off before having another is absolute rubbish - I've got about four or five concurrent ones at the moment (some were quite big, others less so).


----------



## subversplat (Aug 16, 2005)

RaverDrew said:
			
		

> That sounds a bit iffy to me


It sounds like the usual rumour myths that people repeat to each other in the queue for their crisis loans without really thinking about what they're saying.


----------



## tobyjug (Aug 16, 2005)

stuff_it said:
			
		

> apparently if you don't apply for at least 4 crisis loans a year you can get investigated on the basis that no one can survive on benefits alone....




As it is easier to get a ton of rocking horse poo than it is to get a crisis loan I am very certain that is just an urban myth.


----------



## RaverDrew (Aug 16, 2005)

subversplat said:
			
		

> It sounds like the usual rumour myths that people repeat to each other in the queue for their crisis loans without really thinking about what they're saying.



so true !!!


----------



## subversplat (Aug 16, 2005)

tobyjug said:
			
		

> As it is easier to get a ton of rocking horse poo than it is to get a crisis loan I am very certain that is just an urban myth.


 I've only ever been refused one crisis loan. I must just be a silver tongued devil.


----------



## tobyjug (Aug 16, 2005)

subversplat said:
			
		

> I've only ever been refused one crisis loan. I must just be a silver tongued devil.




You are either silver tongued devil or you have a crisis so bad even the Benefits Agency cannot find a reason in the manual to refuse you.
I from time to time help out people in various depths of shit with problems with the Benefits Agency, (I have had a lot of practice with them over my own problems). Getting ANY money out the bastards is a minor miracle.


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 16, 2005)

They seem to be okay with loans (after all we're paying it back right???) but any kind of grant and that's a minor miracle.


----------



## subversplat (Aug 16, 2005)

Maddalene said:
			
		

> They seem to be okay with loans (after all we're paying it back right???) but any kind of grant and that's a minor miracle.


I've never tried for a grant.


----------



## Psychonaut (Aug 16, 2005)

Im told they always give you something like 3* less than you ask for, so to secure enough cash for a battered 2nd hand cooker youll need to price up a brand new top-of-the-range one and ask for that. 

 A lot of the people i know are single with long term mental health issues, so maybe they have more luck than your average unemployed person in a couple.

 theres probably an element of postcode lottery, as with most things...


----------



## past caring (Aug 16, 2005)

Who or what is this Benefits Agency of whom you pontificate?


----------



## tobyjug (Aug 16, 2005)

past caring said:
			
		

> Who or what is this Benefits Agency of whom you pontificate?



A government agency that will do anything it can to avoid giving benefit to people who need it. I call them the Department of Stealth and Total Obscurity.


----------



## Psychonaut (Aug 16, 2005)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Mickelsen



Its customary to post tips before the event takes place, rather than with the (somewhat unfair) benefit of hindsight  

If anyones interested i can post tomorrows Golf Insider tips. They have a profitable long term record.


----------



## past caring (Aug 16, 2005)

tobyjug said:
			
		

> A government agency that will do anything it can to avoid giving benefit to people who need it. I call them the Department of Stealth and Total Obscurity.



I just find it mildly amusing your giving it the barrack room lawyer in respect of an organisation that hasn't existed for over two years.

If you're going to pontificate, get your basic facts right.


----------



## Psychonaut (Aug 18, 2005)

Paulie Tandoori said:
			
		

> ...Anyways, i think this is all a bit of a red herring tbh - the real problem is Psyhonaut's overall capital...



spot on! 

all the talk of fraud seems to have dropped. Im now waiting for accounts to finish rooting through my personal finances (will take forever) and hand me a bill for overpayment.


----------



## tobyjug (Aug 18, 2005)

past caring said:
			
		

> I just find it mildly amusing your giving it the barrack room lawyer in respect of an organisation that hasn't existed for over two years.
> 
> If you're going to pontificate, get your basic facts right.




Changing the name does not change the shit attitude. People still use the word dole on U75 and that has not existed for decades.


----------



## likesfish (Aug 18, 2005)

so its the DWP now new log paint brush round the job centre plus signs same staff same job


----------



## tobyjug (Aug 18, 2005)

likesfish said:
			
		

> so its the DWP now new log paint brush round the job centre plus signs same staff same job




New image same shitty treatment.


----------



## subversplat (Aug 18, 2005)

likesfish said:
			
		

> so its the DWP now new log paint brush round the job centre plus signs same staff same job


If anything, the whole thing's got a lot worse. Has anybody actually tried to get a crisis loan since they've installed the new phone and call-back system? It's a farce.


----------



## Timmy (Dec 3, 2016)

Psychonaut said:


> spot on!
> 
> all the talk of fraud seems to have dropped. Im now waiting for accounts to finish rooting through my personal finances (will take forever) and hand me a bill for overpayment.


What was the end result in this?


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 3, 2016)

Timmy said:


> What was the end result in this?


Why? It was over 11 years ago.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 3, 2016)




----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2016)

Timmy said:


> What was the end result in this?


Do you have a dog in this fight?


----------



## rubbershoes (Dec 4, 2016)

Timmy said:


> What was the end result in this?



You're a little lamb with a lot to learn


----------



## Libertad (Dec 4, 2016)

Hello Timmy.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Dec 4, 2016)

Maybe he googled and got this thread. That's the trouble with the US visa one - a good title


----------



## extra dry (Dec 5, 2016)

Still waiting on those Golf tips. Tiger Woods perhaps?


----------

