Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Reported possible benefit fraud

263 replies

snitchapparently · 25/03/2025 16:16

I suspect someone of claiming carers allowance fraudulently, and after bottling out several times, I just submitted a report. It’s likely to get back to me if something comes of this and I feel like the bad guy for doing it. Am I the bad guy?! Should I just not have said anything?!

To claim you need to be providing 35 hours a week of care and also earn under a certain threshold and I’m fairly sure this person meets neither of those criteria. (If I’m wrong, of course, there will be no ill effect to the claim).

Feel quite stressed.

OP posts:
LilyOfTheValleySoon · 25/03/2025 17:18

snitchapparently · 25/03/2025 17:16

More recently yes, but this is not a new claim. There’s lots of people who have earned too much and not been discovered until later down the line.

Again, if that’s the case and all is well then it’s not an issue is it.

Ah yes, those people who earned 1 pence above the limit and were asked to pay back hundreds of pounds.

Yep they were really the kind of fraudsters you want to catch.

Anewuser · 25/03/2025 17:17

You sound bitter and jealous.

Unless you live in their house and read their payslips, you have no idea what is really happening.

HMRC/DWP will know if they’re earning too much - they certainly did with me when I went £10 over one week and stopped the entire claim. Took months to re-instate.

As already pointed out, it may look like they’re going to work full time but could easily be doing volunteer work and not getting paid. Initially I did voluntarily work before getting a paid role. Now obviously I earn too much so the carers allowance is taken away. Unfortunately my caring role doesn’t disappear so it still do a hundred hours a week - just unpaid.

Silvers11 · 25/03/2025 17:17

snitchapparently · 25/03/2025 17:14

Not in a position to ask unfortunately.

But yes, AA is likely the easiest benefit to get as it’s not assessed whatsoever. Confirmed by staff who process it!

It absolutely IS assessed. Don't care who told you that, it isn't true

But it isn't means tested. Think whoever told you that got mixed up. Or maybe you did when you were told?

snitchapparently · 25/03/2025 17:16

irishbloodenglishparts · 25/03/2025 17:15

Earnings absolutely are linked with HMRC and DWP. I know someone whose income fluctuates and the DWP know which weeks they are from HMRC and doesn’t pay the CA for those weeks.

More recently yes, but this is not a new claim. There’s lots of people who have earned too much and not been discovered until later down the line.

Again, if that’s the case and all is well then it’s not an issue is it.

OP posts:
LilyOfTheValleySoon · 25/03/2025 17:16

snitchapparently · 25/03/2025 17:04

It’s not that I’m doubting, it’s more the societal judgement (as shown here) that made me feel “guilty”, even though I’ve not actually done anything wrong, I’ve followed what’s requested of me.

In this instance, it’s very easy to check if they are earning a full time wage, and if that’s the case, it’s right the benefit is stopped, surely?

lol you have no idea how DWP works….

They migut check. But even if they do and find nothing they will still ask the person to prove that they do the 35 hours, how much they earn etc… Theyre likely to ask to bank statements over the last whatever number of years (often 5 years when it’s about fraud). The person will have x weeks to provide (from all their banks too) the paperwork. Then DWP takes theur time to decide.
And 3~4 months later, they migut say ‘oops, you were right. Nothing to see’.
And during those 4 months, the person has to do without.
Not of course talking about the stress etc….

It will not be as easy as ‘well they can easily see it no?’

PyongyangKipperbang · 25/03/2025 17:16

irishbloodenglishparts · 25/03/2025 17:15

Earnings absolutely are linked with HMRC and DWP. I know someone whose income fluctuates and the DWP know which weeks they are from HMRC and doesn’t pay the CA for those weeks.

Yep I had the same.

The ignorance shown by the OP is staggering.

irishbloodenglishparts · 25/03/2025 17:15

Earnings absolutely are linked with HMRC and DWP. I know someone whose income fluctuates and the DWP know which weeks they are from HMRC and doesn’t pay the CA for those weeks.

PleaseDontFingerMyPouffe · 25/03/2025 17:15

snitchapparently · 25/03/2025 17:04

It’s not that I’m doubting, it’s more the societal judgement (as shown here) that made me feel “guilty”, even though I’ve not actually done anything wrong, I’ve followed what’s requested of me.

In this instance, it’s very easy to check if they are earning a full time wage, and if that’s the case, it’s right the benefit is stopped, surely?

, it’s very easy to check if they are earning a full time wage, and if that’s the case, it’s right the benefit is stopped, surely

Another display of your lack of knowledge here

caringcarer · 25/03/2025 17:14

If this person is truly working full time hours even at NMW they would be earning too much to legitimately claim.

Thisismetooaswell · 25/03/2025 17:14

I'd be very surprised if anyone can work full time without earning too much to claim carer's allowance, it's a very low limit. And the DWP would know through HMRC if the earnings were too high. Time wise, you can very easily care for someone for 35 hours a week even if you are at work all day

snitchapparently · 25/03/2025 17:14

SassK · 25/03/2025 17:02

Maybe you should've asked first, it's too late now for remorse, you've did the damage reporting them. Attendance allowance isn't 'easy' to get either!

Not in a position to ask unfortunately.

But yes, AA is likely the easiest benefit to get as it’s not assessed whatsoever. Confirmed by staff who process it!

OP posts:
lifeturnsonadime · 25/03/2025 17:14

Annajones101 · 25/03/2025 17:13

OP, on MN you must never report fraud. Wonder why people here are so against it. Could it because they are at it themselves? That’s why they defend benefit fraud so vehemently.

What fraud?

The OP doesn't know that fraud has taken place.

Createausernam · 25/03/2025 17:13

ACynicalDad · 25/03/2025 16:35

I suspect this is the proven figure, nobody will know the real one with certainty.

But you are certain that the benefits bill needs shrinking, and that if we could get rid of those who shouldn’t be claiming then there would be less cuts for those that need the support.

Annajones101 · 25/03/2025 17:13

OP, on MN you must never report fraud. Wonder why people here are so against it. Could it because they are at it themselves? That’s why they defend benefit fraud so vehemently.

SassK · 25/03/2025 17:12

The OP clearly grudges the AA too. I count my blessings when I see shit like this on MN, there are some proper bitter and miserable people out there 🤢

Silvers11 · 25/03/2025 17:11

Included is AA which is incredibly easy to get.

Um - no it isn't actually. Claim form is miles long, most people don't understand how to fill it out and many get knocked back , because they try to minimise the difficulties/make adaptations - as an example: They may say they don't have any difficulties dressing themselves, when in fact, they buy things without buttons or zips because they can't handle buttons or zips, use pull on things, cardigans instead of jumpers. All sorts of things

snitchapparently · 25/03/2025 17:11

lifeturnsonadime · 25/03/2025 17:10

Are you interested OP in the fact that I tried to stop claiming carers allowance over a month ago because whilst I still care full time I have found a job that I can wrap around caring and I'm not eligible for universal credit.

I contacted the DWP using the online form and, low and behold, they've still paid it this month even though I've asked them not to.

Perhaps making it easier to stop benefits could be a better angle for the DWP / government to take? I'm perfectly aware that I will now need to pay this back at some point, what a palaver.

That’s not good, poor management of admin.

OP posts:
PyongyangKipperbang · 25/03/2025 17:11

You clearly know nothing about carers allowance or caring. That 35 hours a week can be anything from physcally caring to admin, paying bills, picking up shopping, making appointments etc. If they are working full time in a legit job they wont be getting any money, but they will get the "title" of carer which can help the person being cared for.

I know because when I earned over the threshold I didnt receive any payments but still had an active claim.

Yes you are an interfering busybody. Your time would be better spent campaigning against all the tax avoidance from big companies than victimising someone it sounds like you know very little about!

snitchapparently · 25/03/2025 17:10

ilovesooty · 25/03/2025 17:08

AA isn't incredibly easy to get

Threads like this invariably involve a name change too. It isn't hard to work out why.

It…. really is. It’s completely unassessed. If you say the right thing, you’ll receive it unchallenged. And it’s not a particularly high bar. Most elderly folk could probably get this.

OP posts:
lifeturnsonadime · 25/03/2025 17:10

Are you interested OP in the fact that I tried to stop claiming carers allowance over a month ago because whilst I still care full time I have found a job that I can wrap around caring and I'm not eligible for universal credit.

I contacted the DWP using the online form and, low and behold, they've still paid it this month even though I've asked them not to.

Perhaps making it easier to stop benefits could be a better angle for the DWP / government to take? I'm perfectly aware that I will now need to pay this back at some point, what a palaver.

SerendipityJane · 25/03/2025 17:10

There are 168 hours in a week - so perfectly possible to be spending at least another 35 hours in caring duties, on top of working full time

I had a colleague who could only work from home as they were the only caregiver for their wife. Basically they had to be available 24/7 and fitted their work around that.

snitchapparently · 25/03/2025 17:09

SerendipityJane · 25/03/2025 17:06

It does briefly warm the cockles. However this entire thread will be fed into an "AI" engine somewhere to train it to develop nastier and more dog-whistlely posting styles.

What?

OP posts:
ilovesooty · 25/03/2025 17:08

AA isn't incredibly easy to get

Threads like this invariably involve a name change too. It isn't hard to work out why.

Silvers11 · 25/03/2025 17:07

snitchapparently · 25/03/2025 16:24

Yes I know how much a true carer does, but I don’t believe this is a carer situation. Person works full time, doesn’t spend all day caring for said person.

There will be no affect on their claim if somehow their full time job doesn’t actually earn that much money, which is unlikely.

But fair enough, general consensus is to allow people to claim money not entitled to, I shall keep that one in mind, thanks all for the consensus 😊

There are 168 hours in a week - so perfectly possible to be spending at least another 35 hours in caring duties, on top of working full time Family Carers don't just care for someone Mon to Friday 9am - 5pm.

You may be right though about how much they are earning from that job, being too much to allow them to qualify. Someone I used to work beside was carer for an elderly parent, so had to be careful about how many hours she worked or she would lose the allowance.

If you were sure that they are actually in receipt of carer's allowance AND earning too much money, to claim it, then fair enough - but from what you have said you actually aren't sure about anything in terms of what this person gets/does etc, so on that basis, I think you were being unreasonable

snitchapparently · 25/03/2025 17:06

Riaanna · 25/03/2025 17:02

You can’t claim it fraudulently as it’s based on DLA / PIP entitlement.

I am normally fine with reporting benefit fraud but in this case it’s a bit gross.

No, it isn’t. The person being cared for has to be receiving a certain benefit, PIP/DLA are two of many - all of which are varying degrees of difficulty to get. Included is AA which is incredibly easy to get.

The carer is the one claiming, and they must spend 35 hours or more caring during a week and earn below a certain threshold. Historically systems were not linked and many people claim this fraudulently while earning above the threshold.

OP posts: