UC compliance interview

[PocketSand]

Complicated. DWP appointee so my sons PIP are paid into my account. Used to receive maintenance. No longer receive so applied for UC.

Now UC are investigating me due to gift for house deposit made to son 3 years before claim and using managed PIP money to pay for house repairs of a house he owns.

In addition to being full time carer and self representing contested divorce at court I now have UC demanding 3 years statements of all bank accounts whether current or closed within 2 weeks.

I have given them consent to contact all and any banks - they seem to have details of bank account numbers etc of accounts that have been closed for years where I have no paper statements and no online access etc but they still want me to collate all the info.

Ive only been claiming since December and it’s £234 a month. I wish I’d never claimed.

Not sure I understand this.

Did you give your son money for the house deposit?

If so how much?

Is it your UC claim or one for him that's subject to 'investigation'?

As pp Now UC are investigating me due to gift for house deposit made to son 3 years before claim and using managed PIP money to pay for house repairs of a house he owns.

As pp, so.youve had enough money to gift a house deposit, but are now claiming benefits? Who are you a full time carer for? The son who you helped get a mortgage?

I made a gift to my son 3 years ago from money I received as inheritance. It was not asset deprivation as I didn’t qualify for means tested benefit on the grounds of income as my STBEX paid maintenance. We agreed that he would pay maintenance until I could access pension at 60 as he was already partially retired and accessing unshared pension. So I never expected or intended to receive benefits and will no longer be entitled to do so when PSO is finalised.

STBEX moved in with new partner who he is financially supporting and so couldn’t afford to pay maintenance as well as 100% rent on a 4 bed house for the two of them, all bills etc. So I made a claim for UC as my only income was CA.

I could understand the suspicion of asset deprivation if savings were the only issue and they were gifted with no specific purpose and a claim made soon after but the claim was made due to loss of income. I have all the documentation to show this. It’s just that in the next couple of weeks I have to submit Form E with multiple attachments and submit 3 years statements for current accounts and write to banks for statements of accounts closed years ago and submit these. It all has to be sent as hard copy which will cost a small fortune. Plus usual caring duties. Not surprisingly I am feeling a little stressed and overwhelmed. I am venting.

You are your son’s DWP appointee and receive his PIP

however you also thought it was wise to transfer a very last amount to his personal account for a house deposit. His house?

Face value it looks like you receive his PIP presumably because he can’t manage his own finances

however you transferred a sizeable amount to him as a “gift”

that does look a bit suss op

In your shoes Op, I’d be worried

Do you live with your DS?

I'm not sure I follow all of this, as if you are your sons appointee, how is he able to own a house? But I feel for you, it sounds like a nightmare, you made the decision to contribute to the house deposit when you had been promised maintenance which has since changed, so broadly speaking you aren't that different to lots of people whos circumstances have changed and now need to apply for UC IMO, so im not sure why you are getting quite such a hard time

Is the interview under caution

It’s this that will be ringing alarm bells.

This is a bit convoluted, but since you are your son's appointee, I assume he hasn't capacity to manage his own affairs? So he does he live in the house that the deposit paid for? If yes, how does he manage living independently? If no- who lives there, and are they paying rent? The set up you describe seems odd - using PIP money to pay for repairs on the house.

I would suspect that they think you are hiding something about the house / possible income by putting assets in your son's name and using his money to maintain it. And it may not be only UC who are digging....

As I said I have all the relevant information and the compliance officer with whom I spoke thought there was no cause for concern. It is quite permissible to pay a house deposit 3 years before claiming benefit - JBSP mortgage so I am on the mortgage along with son and STBEX but have no financial interest in the house. These are common products which often parents use to buy a house when their children cannot afford to. It gives security of tenure beyond the life of the parent carer.

These issues have to be carefully planned - most parents of disabled adult children know what it’s like to lie awake at 3am planning the future when they are to frail or dead. There was a recent news report (either sky or bbc) of a young disabled woman who had become homeless after her father and carer had a stroke and died. This is what I want to avoid.

I think it would be much more efficient for the DWP, with consent, to deal with banks etc direct. The DWP know I am DWP representative and don’t need to see copies of my account to see payments being made into it. If I thought any of my actions had been suspicious or that I had reason to worry I would not be happy to consent to them having direct access.

If there is no cause for concern then why are you concerned that they are investigating it? Genuinely confused as to what you are asking?

Because UC investigations are stressful and terrifying, even when you don't think you've done anything wrong. HTH.

@PhilippaGeorgiouI’m more pissed off than ‘concerned’ - I have a lot on my plate at the moment and could do without the hassle I have to go through to prove all is above board. TBH I’m more pissed off with STBEX - none of this would be happening if he had done what he said (in writing).

I’m pissed off with the DWP don’t directly request the information from banks, with my consent. The purpose is surely to access the information - I feel that I am being made to jump through hoops unnecessarily as some sort of punishment when I have done nothing wrong.

Like I said, I am venting not asking and am not worried or concerned. The interview was not under caution, it was compliance not fraud and the compliance officer had no concerns with a lump sum being used for gift for house deposit and my son’s PIP being used to fund repairs and maintenance for his house. It’s in his best interests that his home meets need especially as he is largely housebound.

Appreciate that you are venting but It sounds like you are being naive DWP compliance meetings are serious and not just compliance. They are not undertaken lightly. They can and do often lead to fraud convictions. As you have already been through the interview advice is a bit late now.

Very odd

Your son doesn’t have the capacity to have PIP deposited in to his account but he does have the capacity for you to “gift” him a large sum of money for a house deposit (would that by any chance be your house Op?)

Either way…they will comb over everything I imagine op so brace yourself

I am not worried or concerned

I would be both

Is your name also on the house ?

If your name is on the deeds with land registry then the property is classed as your asset, which is presumably building equity to which, on paper, you are entitled to a share of if it’s sold. The old housing benefit rules allowed for an exemption if the property was occupied by a disabled person - no idea if UC rules are the same

I think you've been unclear, sorry.

Is it your UC claim that's being investigated or is it your son's?
Who's name is the house in?
Who lives in the house?

This, am assuming you will live in your sons house then?
Will you pay him rent?

So far as OP is concerned they seem to have received an inheritance three years ago. At that stage they were being maintained by ex-partner.

Part/all of the inheritance was used as a deposit on a house the OP's son lives in. That's a normalish thing for parents to do. The fact he needs an appointee for PIP is neither here nor there. It's perfectly possible for people so seriously incapacitated that the Court of Protection is involved to have the purchase of a house in their name facilitated.

There's no basis for accusations son was given a large sum. It's perfectly possible OP handed it directly to solicitors acting for her son when the purchase was in progress.

If ex has stopped maintaining OP and they've no income then they should claim UC. Giving money away is not, of itself, deprivation; there has to be intent at the time to acquire title to benefit or to more benefit.

On facts set out DWP action seems heavy handed.

I wonder if 'STBX' has been stirring with UC?

Try not to stress darling,you havent done anything wrong,everything will work out,to the rest of you,shame on you! This is supposed to be a support forum,have some compassion!