The Corporate Director – Resources presented a report, the purpose of which, was to inform the Committee of the activities that have been undertaken in the first six months of this financial year with regard to Housing and Council Tax Benefit fraud investigations, compared with the position during the same period in 2014/15. In addition, the report also summarises the activities undertaken and the results achieved during the financial year 2014/15.

The Head of Finance and ICT confirmed that The Fraud Team of the Benefits Section was responsible for the investigation of allegations of Housing and Council Tax Benefit fraud. Fraud Investigators were required to conduct the whole investigation from the initial allegation being received, to closure of the case and preparation of a sanction if appropriate. The Fraud Team consisted of a Fraud Manager, 3 FTE Fraud Investigators and was supported by a Collator/Administrative Officer.

He then confirmed, as was expanded upon within the report, that under the Government’s proposal to create a single fraud investigation service (SFIS) the majority of staff within the Fraud Section had recently transferred to the Department for Works and Pensions (DWP) as part of a phased programme running from June 2014 to March 2016.

The Head of Finance and ICT then referred to paragraph 4.5 of the report, where Table 1 in this paragraph summarised Fraud Referrals, which reflected that during the first half of 2015/16, there had been a significant decrease in the number of referrals accepted by the Team.

He then referred to paragraph 4.6 of the report, and Table 2, which illustrated a breakdown of the types of cases that have been investigated in the periods shown ie April – September 2014 and April – September 2015.

He confirmed that investigations into alleged living together situations remained a major element of Benefit Fraud investigation within the County Borough. This type of investigation was extremely difficult to prove as it required a very strong standard of evidence. It cannot be decided on prescriptive criteria, but relies solely on judgement made on a case by case basis related to the evidence available. Inevitably, due to the necessity of gathering sufficient evidence this type of investigation can be very time consuming he added.

Paragraph 4.8 of the report, then confirmed that during 2014/15, 315 cases were closed and the closure categories were shown in Table 3 in this part of the report.

The Head of Finance and ICT then confirmed to the Committee that once a case has been closed as fraud proven and the overpayment calculated, the

case is referred to the Benefits Sanctions Panel. The Panel, consisting of three

senior members of the Benefits Team, use the Benefits Prosecution Policy to

decide what, if any, further action should be taken (beyond overpayment recovery).

The recommendation of the Sanctions Panel is considered by the Council’s Legal Department and a final decision on the sanction is made.

Table 4 in paragraph 4.10 then illustrated the sanction action taken in the relevant periods shown in this Table.

RESOLVED:                      That the report be noted.