Been interviewed by fraud dept re allegations of working whilst off sick

[bluebottle]

Re: Been interviewed by fraud dept re allegations of working whilst off sick

If I can add to Nikolai's post - Thanks for confirming about PACE, Nikolai - PACE exists to protect individuals against abuse of the judicial process. As well as being subject to PACE, NHS Counter Fraud are also subject to the Criminal Procedures Rules 2011, which means they have to comply with its disclosure requirements. If NHS Counter Fraud has not complied with these requirements, they might as well destroy the tapes and paperwork and forget it ever happened because it will get picked up at a later date and result in the case being binned.

[sairlp]

Re: Been interviewed by fraud dept re allegations of working whilst off sick

Thanks for advice/ support....am so annoyed that we are in this position, seems so unfair and unjust, when there are people who are constantly and deliberately milking the system.
what is also upsetting is that my husband has a fantastic reputation and is excellent at his work and thought very highly of. At the time I delivered these blasted yellow pages, he had only been off work for about 2 weeks, with work related stress, which rapidly became a clinical depression, and it makes me wonder who on earth reported him, I believe it must be someone we know or live near to as not many others would have even realised he was off sick in just a couple of weeks! Just that alone, that someone could be so malicious, as to report something that could have dire consequences, has caused him even more anxt!
I may be being silly, but why is it helpful to have a copy of the recorded interview?
Am really concerned as it is just our word that it was I that was intending to do the job, surely anyone would say that even if it wasn't the case?!
oh dear, just hope that they have a human moment and realise in the greater scheme of things it's very petty, and he just gets a slap on hand for being silly

[enquirer]

Re: Been interviewed by fraud dept re allegations of working whilst off sick

I would be interested to discover quite how they obtained copies of both the Yellow Pages paperwork and the cheque. If they have acted illegally, then that would be a stick to beat them with. I would expect both firms to refuse to disclose anything unless compelled to do so by a court order.

[sairlp]

Re: Been interviewed by fraud dept re allegations of working whilst off sick

My husband has just talked to solicitors, and they are going to write and ask for copies of all paperwork and the tape fron the counter fraud dept
again thanks for all usefull comments and advice

[sairlp]

Re: Been interviewed by fraud dept re allegations of working whilst off sick

Yay!! Just received a letter from Fraud Dept saying the matter would go no further with them, they have had to write to HR but hopefully this will be fine.
Common sense does prevail sometimes!
Thanks for help all

[bluebottle]

Re: Been interviewed by fraud dept re allegations of working whilst off sick

Good news. NHS Counter Fraud must have known they were on unsafe ground, otherwise they would have gone further. If HR have any sense, they will call in the person who made the allegation that gave rise to the involvement of NHS Counter Fraud and take disciplinary action against them, if it is found to be malicious. If it was someone who cannot add up, i.e. 2 + 2 = 5, then, at the very least, they should be administered a warning about making allegations without first carrying out at least something resembling an investigation before shooting their mouths off.

[enquirer]

Re: Been interviewed by fraud dept re allegations of working whilst off sick

As the OP's husband is obviously named on NHS paperwork, then surely that would fall within a SAR? If they are careless (and they often are), they might fail to redact the name of the accuser or other identifying details.

[wales01man]

Re: Been interviewed by fraud dept re allegations of working whilst off sick

While im pleased the OP is not subject to further action i think that the fraud alleged is in a way similar to benefit fraud where a claimant is found to be working whilst claiming benefit even if the wages were paid into someone elses bank account im also sure many on this forum some who are themselves having to claim benefits will agree that frausters defrauding the public purse either in receipt of benefits or salaries must be brought to account the innocent have nothing to fear but the guilty should suffer their fate Reading the thread i suspect the OP made a mistake in helping out someone the fraud department have investigated and no further action is to be taken

[sairlp]

Re: Been interviewed by fraud dept re allegations of working whilst off sick

Thanks enquirer, call me naive...what does OP stand for, and what's a SAR?
OK, you can call me stupid as well! Lol

[sairlp]

Re: Been interviewed by fraud dept re allegations of working whilst off sick

I totally agree Scottiedog! We are all for justness and fairness and it enrages me when people deliberately con the system, while there are genuine people who need benefits. Ours was a genuine mistake, as mentioned my husband had been off for about 2 weeks with stress when I cohersed him into driving me around as we were penniless, never for one moment did it cross either of our minds that this would be deemed as him working on his part. If only he had been fit enough to work, as the following 6 mths were a living nightmare for him with his depression
I am fully aware that the NHS is a notorious working place for people to be signed off sick, especially from one NHS trust and then work for another, and the counter fraud dept is definitely required in this area. It has just caused needless added stress to us, when it was a genuine mistake, just a kind husband helping me out. Let's hope HR don't take any action...we're not really sure what to expect!

[bluebottle]

Re: Been interviewed by fraud dept re allegations of working whilst off sick

Thanks enquirer, call me naive...what does OP stand for, and what's a SAR?
OK, you can call me stupid as well! Lol

OP = Original Poster
SAR = Subject Access Request

When you ask a company, local authority, etc., to send you details of all information they hold on you in exercise of your statutory right under Section 7, Data Protection Act 1998, it is called a Subject Access Request.

[Nikolai]

Re: Been interviewed by fraud dept re allegations of working whilst off sick

Your husband has done nothing wrong, so let's not refer to slaps on the wrist etc. The person who deserves to be slapped is the one who reported his (entirely legal) activity in helping you deliver Yellow Pages. Glad to hear about the letter you received, I thought they had no case there from what you said. Hope your husband is encouraged by this result!

[sairlp]

Re: Been interviewed by fraud dept re allegations of working whilst off sick

ARGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!! Can't blimmin believe what's happening. The delightful NHS Trust has decided, on reading Counter Fraud Dept report, on disciplining my husband for Fraud. They said that the CFD didn't take it down prosecution route due to small amount of money, but in the Trusts view my husband was "dishonest beyond reasonable doubt" and had been employed by another company whilst off sick from Trust.
As you can imagine, my husband, still not mentally robust enough to deal with all this is incensed, anxious, preoccupied and flabbergasted!Really need some advice please, unfortunately Union reps are lack lustre to say the least, and have not been at all helpfull. We need help on several issues
a) we seem unable to get a copy of the report that the CFD sent to HR. We need this as we need to see all the information that the managers made their recommendations on, so that we can put together a transparent, fair and clear case. HR say they are unable to give us it, we contacted the CFD they said they couldn't send as it would implicate 3rd parties :-/, when we asked the union they said they didn't think we had a right to it either (you would like to think Unions would know as opposed to think!)The CFD emailed some "salient" points she thought were relevant, but these seemed to Nigel's recollection not how things were
b) Do you feel there should have been an informal investigation / managers investigation, to talk this through with my husband before heading head first into Disciplinary Hearing, we feel that punishment really doesn't fit crime
c) the original hearing date was for 27th Dec, the only day off my husband had throughout the Xmas season, due to this they postponed it.
Not surprisingly, my husband has been signed off sick again, losing all his enhanced Christmas pay, not being able to enjoy his time with the family, infact totally preoccupied all time. So now the hearing is prob going to be at end of this month.

This is where it all gets a little complex but is very relevant and of great concern...back in July,prior to his return to work, Nigel was visiting his Dept as part of his return to work. A colleague approached him and told him that she thought he should know, that a manager had said to her and some others "that (hubby's name) has apparently been working, doing DIY and other house projects while off sick, we're going to investigate". This upset us greatly as Nige hadn't been working etc etc and what on earth was a manager doing slandering his good name around the hospital. My husband was going to take a grievance out against this chap, but at this time the colleagues who had heard this information werent willing to put this in writing and unions said that without this he really wouldn't have a case. Anyway, transpires that this same manager( who may I point out was new to this area and had never met my husband) was the manager who was delegated to to the report on the CFD stuff......surely this isn't right that a manager that has acted in a wholly unprofessional way is able to take on this role?

Due to this being taken further my husband had again contacted the colleagues that heard this info and they have now agreed to put it all in writing.We met with 2 union reps on 27th and they didn't appear to have much of a clue, they said that the Trust did have enough to dismiss him if they wanted to, but felt that due to his exemplary 30+ year history they wouldn't. They thought they probably would sanction him in some way, and we got the feeling that we should just accept this and not appeal....how crap is that?There is another part to all this, which I will add at a later time, really keen and hopeful will get some advice and guidance from here
Thanking you in anticipation

[bluebottle]

Re: Been interviewed by fraud dept re allegations of working whilst off sick

You may need a court order to force the documentation out of the NHS Trust involved. Your husband is entitled to see what evidence he has against him. However, what intrigues me and, indeed, makes me suspicious of the motives of management and HR is the phrase -

"HR say they are unable to give us it. We contacted the CFD they said they couldn't send as it would implicate 3rd parties"

Oh really? And in what way would it "implicate third parties"? That sounds very much to me like someone has made a malicious allegation and HR and CFD are now back-pedalling like fury in an attempt to cover their own backsides. Get a court order and force the facts out of them. You would, probably, need a Mandatory Order, but I am afraid I couldn't tell you what the court fees would be. I do know that a Prohibitory Order costs £175. Enquire at your local county court.

[sairlp]

Re: Been interviewed by fraud dept re allegations of working whilst off sick

Thanks Bluebottle
Have just looked at the email from CFD and the response was....verbatim this time
"It is not our policy to do so, in order to protect the contents and the operational methods, as well as details of any third party involvement"
Slightly different to what I remembered and had put in previous post
does this sound like a more feasible reason from them?
Thanks