To think this “crackdown” on benefit fraud is absolutely pathetic

[MissLou0]

We lose hundreds of billions from tax avoidance compared to 1 billion on benefit fraud and nothing is done about it, because those are the Tory donors. Michelle Mone just stole £28 million from taxpayers for her PPE scam, she’s not in trouble, and she of course also hides her hundreds of millions offshore.

We lose a small amount from benefit fraud, and as a result everyone who claims any sort of benefit including disability benefits banks are going to be monitored.

The graph below doesn’t even scratch the surface of how much is lost to tax avoidance. For example Rupert Murdoch is worth £17 billion and he hasn’t paid tax in years, personal tax or on his businesses. And he’s ONE person. These people are not targeted yet the most desperate and vulnerable are.

This is completely ignored by the media as the majority of newspaper owners are hiding their money offshore.

I’m in a situation where I don’t need to claim any benefits but I have family who are disabled who have had to fight for even the tiniest amount to live on, and they are now having to deal with this invasion of privacy which will make not even 0.000001% of what cracking down on tax avoidance would.

You think it's open to legal challenge? I think the DWP know it will be very very hard to challenge.

AI will arguably make more rational decisions than a human being. It will have millions of data points to compare and justify the decision unlike now. That is highly defensible on judicial review, never mind at an individual level for a claimant who wants payment.

Challenge the AI? You need an expert to see if it discriminates. You need to see the code and get it disclosed to do that.

All the while, the claimant gets no money.

No government will ever drop AI. It will shield them like nothing else.

@FFSMabel

i am not saying it is a lot but unlike many other companies who DO NOT get the stick (like Tesco, Hermes or your local pizza or Indian restaurant) they were paying the living wage

The proposed action is to monitor bank accounts and this will be for every bank account associated with an individual not just their bank account but joint accounts and further. So not only will they be able to monitor abnormal activity but also the possible undeclared income from savings they have in associated accounts. So if you have move savings to your sisters account so you are under the limit they will know.
The banks AI systems are forensic in their action. My account is often locked down if there is abnormal activity, such as buying items at a Christmas fare last year. Because the stores have card machines but the machine is not in a registered location the activity becomes suspicious. My bank phone me and ask if I am using the card or if there is a security problem. This happens in minutes.
It also was put in special measures a few years ago when my exBIL was being investigated. I had a joint account with my sister and she had a joint account with her ex which linked our accounts. We never found out why it was a problem and I only discovered my account was in special measures when a mortgage was declined unexpectedly. Obviously banks have been able to monitor customer accounts for a long time, and it is a lot more advanced than people realise.

Legislation is required to allow DWP to access this system and they may include HMRC.

If you have nothing to hide there is no problem. If you are depositing a lot of money but with no obvious source then it will flag up.
I suspect the same people moaning about tax evasion and avoidance will also moan about privacy.
If we want to fix both systems we must have no problem having our personal finances scrutinised.
VAT evasion is another big area of lost revenue so I imagine they will be added too.

Since DWP and HMRC are intertwined the proposed investigations may well uncover significant unpaid tax associated with fraudulent benefit claims. People who commit fraud are happy to do it across the board.

Of course cash is the way forward but it is becoming more and more difficult to use cash. Paying your household bills is difficult using cash. Any forensic investigation flagged up by a fraud case will involve all an individuals living costs and how they pay them. So if your benefits and wages are not being used to pay utilities or other significant outgoings then it will flag up. You may then have to explain where cash is coming from.

They were also looking at adding arrest, search & asset seizing powers along with bank account monitoring when first reported maybe a year or 2 ago which I expect would tie in but isn't being mentioned in headlines. They'd have to use the police for those aspects currently, which would at least offer some more protection given you can complain to IOPC if feel they've not followed procedures.

DWP do already request bank checks and randomly select some claiments to provide info to see if over savings limits or any signs fraud i.e undeclared income. This will be continual monitoring probably more so if you go over they can claw it back i expect than just intentional fraud. Although you'd hope they'd discount when they have to pay large backpayments from saving limits as I had 2yrs worth from claim to tribunal, sometimes it's even more because they've underpaid years.

Yea. I always thought that this kind of checking would never happen because of cost, and co-ordination across government departments and then to the private sector. It would be too expensive and prone to failure.

AI has changed all of that in a moment. This has already been successfully done in part of the UK.

Everyone I know who claims benefits and has undeclared income coming in use cash only, so monitoring bank accounts is pointless and won’t catch the majority of benefit fraudsters anyway

The system does need to change but I don’t think this is the right way to go about it

Yes, both should absolutely be dealt with. The whole point is that only one group is being dealt with though, and it's not the super rich.

However I wonder what the figure is for people that never appeal thst would win, all thst money is saved from not having to pay pip. Not saying this is right as often the ones that don’t appeal are the most vulnerable, don’t have support to help them appeal etc

There's an election due and the Tories are all out of ideas.

It's all very well saying cash will avoid this. But actually that gets hard, it say, you buy a plane ticket, or have another large expense that you have to run through your account.

Okay then someone else pays it for you. But then they will have their account checked too. You buy something at the airport. DWP has to the power to check you leaving the country. How did you get the money for a ticket? AI turns payments off until you explain.

So it's this AI looks for. The part where you spend in ways that look totally normal. But it will compare the pattern of your spending compared to many others.

But it wouldn’t be unsustainable if tax evasion/avoidance didn’t happen would it? (And yes, avoidance is legal but that doesn’t mean it’s right.)

I never understand this complete lack of logic….it comes up every time on these threads.

Exactly this.

And the people who give up before appeal.

I also know someone in my daughter’s support group who had to be properly persuaded not to give up when the DWP wrote to them after they won their appeal to say that they weren’t paying out yet as they are considering if they should appeal the appeal.

That person applied, was turned down, waiting 8 weeks for a mandatory reconsideration, then has waited 14 months for an appeal and is now on week 5 of the DWP considering an appeal against the appeal (which they can only do if there has been an error in law so it’s very obviously a stalling tactic as it’s happening to more and more people).

The cost of appeals is phenomenal and hidden. Plus any normal person who made the wrong decision 7 times out of 10 would lose their job. Yet it’s ok for the dwp to do that and cost everyone a fortune to rectify it (and leave someone in financial difficult)

Also on appeals. This is designed to cut that cost too. The chances of a claimant appealing are far less, still less being able to make an argument against the findings of AI. Costs cut everywhere

Yes, exactly, how does that work when AI is being deployed using unscrupulous algorithms? Show your workings with respect to the Human Rights Act.

I don't think if there is suspected fraud the monitoring of an account is unjustified. Fraud is a serious crime that gets you a prison sentence. I think you can justify it easy enough or at least there would be a good argument to say why it was acceptable.

I can see potential legal challenges too because the things for which a claimant will use PIP and other disability cost benefits are not always trackable or obvious. For example someone who’s incontinent will spend more on clothing, bedding, washing products, higher bills due to more frequent washing/drying. Some may have to have the heating on more than usual, taxi fares because they can’t use public transport, more fuel for cars, paying someone to do housework, etc. All it will lead to is these cost based benefits becoming more and more restrictive and less people will qualify because they can’t demonstrate the real effects of their disability. The current PIP application concentrates mainly on what help you need from another person and what aids and appliances you use. The real day to day costs are not assessed - including most of those mentioned above.

Just because rich people avoid tax and exploit loopholes that doesn't mean people on low incomes who cheat the benefit system are heroes. They're not.

The benefit system is based on simple principle. We all pay a bit into the pot so that when others are old or sick or unable to find a job they are taken care of. Fine. That's a noble and beautiful thing (and I say that as a centrist-conservative). But we all know people who cheat that system. They exaggerate their mental and physical illness, have lots of kids so they can get a house, or simply put in repeat prescriptions and don't show up for GP appointments. Yes, a greedy and amoral businessman is selfish, but so is a benefit cheat. They are cheats. They're cheating you and me. They're cheating your kids and your grandparents. They take money that could be spent on your kid's school, or on a new drop in centre for old people.

Remember, there is no magic money tree. You can't spend money you don't earn. The welfare system costs this country an absolute fortune, and is barely sustainable. To make it worse, the kinds of people who cheat the system tend to be violent, ignorant, and anti-social, and they raise violent, ignorant, anti-social children, who then become a burden on society and on the taxpayer. I have people near me who don't work. They have effectively been given a house, paid for by my tax. And here I am, a total mug, getting up at five in the morning and slogging my guts out in a job I hate to support them. In return, their kids run riot on the estate and ruin everybody's life.

A lot of what companies do is not illegal. Also we want big companies in the UK making money.

Benefits fraud is always illegal.

Also a lot of people claiming benefits "legitimately" could actually work. You see it all the time for "depression" or a "carer" to an anxious wife or something Or single mums / Dad's with a load of children where it's not financially viable to work.

Since when do the Tories care about the Human Rights Act ? The problem here is that we’re not just talking about monitoring the accounts of those suspected of fraud - as happens now. That’s fair enough if there’s reason to think they’re doing something dishonest.

But what we’re talking about here is the wholesale monitoring of the bank accounts of every person claiming benefit, by AI designed to stop payment if it detects something it perceives as amiss. When you claim benefit, you accept that the DWP shares your information with various other bodies and collects information from them. This is an extension of that, and we’re sleepwalking into it. Someone upthread said the sooner the Tories are voted out the better. Does anyone really think a change of government will stop it. I’d wager that the preparations for it are well underway and unstoppable.

Every bit of legislation passed in Parliament must be compatible with the Human Rights Act. This will be justified as the prevention of serious crime which is what fraud is. The fact that it is small amounts in theory will not make a difference to this. If they are looking for fraud, then this is justified more easily than you think

This is a really depressing post. Most people I know who are carers also work. The problem is that for the measly amount of money they get for caring duties which save the tax payer a fortune, they have to undertake to be a carer for at least 35 hours a week and the earnings threshold, like all means tested benefits, is set low. I’ve seen people burnt out because of exhausting caring duties on top of full time work, so why are you insinuating that hoardes of people are using it as an excuse to skive. The same with depression and anxiety - very real conditions and sometimes crippling in their severity. And single parents already have some compulsion to find work if their child is over a certain age. Yes there will always be those who seek to play the system, but they’re not nearly as common as successive governments would like you to believe.

Yep, this. They will find a way around it.

A lot of very vulnerable people don’t even bother applying for PIP in the first place because they can’t face the complicated application process. And more will just accept a wrong decision without appealing for the same reason. The help they need to get a fair shake isn’t easily accessible. A large proportion of those with mental health problems are thought to be in this cohort.

Yes, one of the things so missed in all these measures to make it harder to claim is that the small number healthy lazy people on the fiddle are better placed to jump through the hoops than the people who actually need it are.

Especially as more and more support places are cut and have funding slashed.

How do we know how much money is actually lost to benefit fraud though? I would imagine most people committing benefit fraud probably are never caught, so the true cost is likely to be much much higher.