Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking
Using fraud figures is meaningless, of course. Can be difficult to find and prove. If somebody commits fraud using your bank account, usually you will notice it. The difference with benefit fraud is that it can be less obvious and noticeable and go undetected, sometimes for more than ten years.
You only have to look at some of the Upper Tribunal decisions, some of which are published, to see people trying it on.
Eg Guy with, according to the specialists, very minor problem to his shoulder, complaining that he is afraid to go out unaccompanied for being afraid of being attacked because of the minor problems in that one arm. He's ok, if his wife is there to defend him.  Do you buy that?
Eg Somebody had claimed and received the maximum £1,000 in Housing Benefit, when his actual rent was about a quarter of that.  £750 a time(each week?, after all we're talking Islington) in his pocket. His excuse was some unspecified person told him he could do that. He won a rehearing at another First Tier Tribunal. |
If the DWP aren’t applying the law correctly they’ll lose at Tribunals. Especially the Upper Tier - I don’t accept that your one line summaries of these cases are accurate reflections of reality.
As First Tier Tribunal decisions aren’t published I’m interested in how you know the facts of the second case. Do you work for DWP? If so, you should consider the Civil Service Code and reputational risk to the Department by your attitude towards benefit claimants in general exhibited on this forum.
If you heard it from a “man in the pub” that probably says all we need to know.