Consequences of false claim

[mazdr]

Re: Consequences of false claim

Have you received any other benefits? I take it your partner has lived with you all the time you have been claiming? How much money are we talking about?,,as Eloise says,,without some sort of ballpark figure it is impossible to even attempt a guess at what action the council may or may not take.

ballpark figure is £600

And no i never claimed anything else although as i only work part time i am entitled to housing benefit

[Eloise01]

Re: Consequences of false claim

This is interesting

One would hope to rely on the system being as dismissive as when fraud allegations are directed towards a council.

Somehow I don't think it works that way...

I cannot see how this relates to The OP's situation, and cannot comment on an entirely different situation which I know nothing about. But in the OP's case it would appear that they have claimed a benefit to which they are not entitled knowing they were not entitled to it. In so doing they will have signed a declaration stating that their claim is truthful, or words to that effect. That is fairly compelling evidence of dishonesty. What we are trying, rather unsuccessfully, to do here is to work out how that dishonesty happened, so as to present it in the best possible light.

[Eloise01]

Re: Consequences of false claim

ballpark figure is £600

And no i never claimed anything else although as i only work part time i am entitled to housing benefit

OK. Let's try this even simpler. Was there a point in time when you were telling the truth and you were entitled to the single persons discount? What changed and when? When someone esle moved in, did you intend that to be permanant? Tell us the story of what happened. These sorts of facts may make a difference to how you tell the story to the council. It isn't about lying to them - it is about making the facts look as good as possible.

[bluebottle]

Re: Consequences of false claim

Without more information, we can't really advise you correctly. If the council did proceed to court, the onus is on them to prove their case and you run the risk of having the hearing presided over by Justices of the Peace. These are, allegedly, "pillars of the community". Speaking as a retired policeman, "pillocks of the community" is a more accurate description. Sometimes, I used to wonder which planet they were on. They take what is presented to them without weighing the evidence. District Judges, who are time-served solicitors and barristers, are better as they weigh the evidence and take all circumstances into account, something JPs do not appear to do. Sorry to say this, but that is the reality.

[Inca]

Re: Consequences of false claim

So..you claimed Ctax benefit you were not entitled to......but didn't claim Housing Benefit you are entitled to?

[outlawlgo]

Re: Consequences of false claim

I cannot see how this relates to The OP's situation, and cannot comment on an entirely different situation which I know nothing about. But in the OP's case it would appear that they have claimed a benefit to which they are not entitled knowing they were not entitled to it. In so doing they will have signed a declaration stating that their claim is truthful, or words to that effect. That is fairly compelling evidence of dishonesty. What we are trying, rather unsuccessfully, to do here is to work out how that dishonesty happened, so as to present it in the best possible light.

That told me! I'll leave you to it then....

[leclerc]

Re: Consequences of false claim

I cannot see how this relates to The OP's situation, and cannot comment on an entirely different situation which I know nothing about. But in the OP's case it would appear that they have claimed a benefit to which they are not entitled knowing they were not entitled to it. In so doing they will have signed a declaration stating that their claim is truthful, or words to that effect. That is fairly compelling evidence of dishonesty. What we are trying, rather unsuccessfully, to do here is to work out how that dishonesty happened, so as to present it in the best possible light.

Eloise, I think there is something important within that letter which is the case law of Ghosh v. R which is a case from 1982 based on dishonesty. I will quote in full(the important bit that is which relates to the legal definition of dishonesty) and then give you the reference:

1. "In determining whether the prosecution has proved that the defendant was acting dishonestly, a jury must first of all decide whether according to the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people what was done was dishonest. If it was not dishonest by those standards, that is the end of the matter and the prosecution fails.
   If it was dishonest by those standards, then the jury must consider whether the defendant himself must have realised that what he was doing was by those standards dishonest. In most cases, where the actions are obviously dishonest by ordinary standards, there will be no doubt about it. It will be obvious that the defendant himself knew that he was acting dishonestly. It is dishonest for a defendant to act in a way which he knows ordinary people consider to be dishonest, even if he asserts or genuinely believes that he is morally justified in acting as he did.
   For example, Robin Hood or those ardent anti-vivisectionists who remove animals from vivisection laboratories are acting dishonestly, even though they may consider themselves to be morally justified in doing what they do, because they know that ordinary people would consider these actions to be dishonest."
   
   
   http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup...method=boolean

[bluebottle]

Re: Consequences of false claim

Eloise, I think there is something important within that letter which is the case law of Ghosh v. R which is a case from 1982 based on dishonesty. I will quote in full(the important bit that is which relates to the legal definition of dishonesty) and then give you the reference:

1. "In determining whether the prosecution has proved that the defendant was acting dishonestly, a jury must first of all decide whether according to the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people what was done was dishonest. If it was not dishonest by those standards, that is the end of the matter and the prosecution fails.
   If it was dishonest by those standards, then the jury must consider whether the defendant himself must have realised that what he was doing was by those standards dishonest. In most cases, where the actions are obviously dishonest by ordinary standards, there will be no doubt about it. It will be obvious that the defendant himself knew that he was acting dishonestly. It is dishonest for a defendant to act in a way which he knows ordinary people consider to be dishonest, even if he asserts or genuinely believes that he is morally justified in acting as he did.
   For example, Robin Hood or those ardent anti-vivisectionists who remove animals from vivisection laboratories are acting dishonestly, even though they may consider themselves to be morally justified in doing what they do, because they know that ordinary people would consider these actions to be dishonest."
   
   
   http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup...method=boolean

A very familiar ruling to me, Leclerc. If the Ghosh Test, as it is known, is not satisfied, dishonesty is not proven and the case fails. It only requires one of the two parts of the test to not be satisfied for the test to fail.

[Eloise01]

Re: Consequences of false claim

Eloise, I think there is something important within that letter which is the case law of Ghosh v. R which is a case from 1982 based on dishonesty. I will quote in full(the important bit that is which relates to the legal definition of dishonesty) and then give you the reference:

1. "In determining whether the prosecution has proved that the defendant was acting dishonestly, a jury must first of all decide whether according to the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people what was done was dishonest. If it was not dishonest by those standards, that is the end of the matter and the prosecution fails.
   If it was dishonest by those standards, then the jury must consider whether the defendant himself must have realised that what he was doing was by those standards dishonest. In most cases, where the actions are obviously dishonest by ordinary standards, there will be no doubt about it. It will be obvious that the defendant himself knew that he was acting dishonestly. It is dishonest for a defendant to act in a way which he knows ordinary people consider to be dishonest, even if he asserts or genuinely believes that he is morally justified in acting as he did.
   For example, Robin Hood or those ardent anti-vivisectionists who remove animals from vivisection laboratories are acting dishonestly, even though they may consider themselves to be morally justified in doing what they do, because they know that ordinary people would consider these actions to be dishonest."
   
   
   http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup...method=boolean

I am fully aware of the test and the case. What I am struggling with is how signing a claim form every year for a few years saying that you are the only person living at a property when you are not and know that you are not, in order to obtain a financial benefit, could conceiveably fail the test! To be fair, the OP admits that they have fraudulently claimed. The person to whom I was responding introduced an entirely different "case" and suggested that there are double standards in that a particular council in another unrelated matter had acted dishonestly. I have no idea what their case is about, but it has no relevance to the OP's situation in which they have knowingly committed fraud. I would expect that the same standards should be applied to everyone - whoever they are - and if they are not, that is wrong. But that isn't in the slightest bit relevant to the OP's situation.

[enquirer]

Re: Consequences of false claim

If they simply stop claiming, that may just as likely raise a query about why they have suddenly stopped claiming and prompt an investigation into their circumstances.

Unlikely, and even if some jobsworth does ask, the OP is not required to explain why they are not claiming something.

[Eloise01]

Re: Consequences of false claim

Unlikely, and even if some jobsworth does ask, the OP is not required to explain why they are not claiming something.

Ah, no. Debt I am rubbish at. Council tax regulations I am rubbish at. But I know someone who isn't rubbish at the latter! And really knows their stuff about why and how council's investigate fraud, on account of running the Department!

What they refer to as "speculative investigation" is often triggered by something as simple as ending a claim. They may decide to run a linked system check - these are run randomly most of the time, but you can get lucky and not have one for years. One of those, for example, could throw up a birth record and claims for SMP, say. You'd be amazed what information is accessible. I know I am shocked by it. If you thi nk big brother is watching you, you have no idea. - it's the entire family! But a linked system flag would go up - as Inca earlier suggested, there isn't a high level of belief in immaculate conceptions in Council's. That could lead to further record checks and/ or some very nice people asking the neighbours questions.

It is often the smallest thing that leads to an investigation.

[Inca]

Re: Consequences of false claim

I had to use a different surname on emails etc after my run in with my ex..I happened to email my Council about rubbish collections and within days had a 'visit' from them,,my email name had pinged an 'uh oh' on their system.Simple explanation,they were satisfied with it (cos it was true) but I was stunned that such an inocuos thing could set their alarm bells ringing.

[ploddertom]

Re: Consequences of false claim

Personally I think what may happen if you admit everything and offer to pay it off is that you will be interviewed under caution but because of the sum involved will receive a Caution and be told in no uncertain terms they will watch you for the next xx years and fully investigate any further claim you make.

[Eloise01]

Re: Consequences of false claim

Personally I think what may happen if you admit everything and offer to pay it off is that you will be interviewed under caution but because of the sum involved will receive a Caution and be told in no uncertain terms they will watch you for the next xx years and fully investigate any further claim you make.

Which, in all honesty, would be fair enough. It is fraud and there are consequences... Sometimes you just have to accept the consequences of your own actions.

[Eloise01]

Re: Consequences of false claim

I had to use a different surname on emails etc after my run in with my ex..I happened to email my Council about rubbish collections and within days had a 'visit' from them,,my email name had pinged an 'uh oh' on their system.Simple explanation,they were satisfied with it (cos it was true) but I was stunned that such an inocuos thing could set their alarm bells ringing.

Jeez, my council must be very confused. I have had three surnames (OK, admittedly one I never used, but I was married to the louse) on their system over three decades, and I'd lay bets they can't even promounce one of them!