This isn't really a welfare rights matter as such but I would be grateful for some advice.

If a person uses an assumed name to obtain credit are they committing an offence?

This is definitely not a case of identity theft , the name that may have been used is not linked to any other person and in fact no trace of anyone bearing that name has been found.

Leaving aside any questions of untruthful income declarations on credit applications etc (which are clearly fraud) is it per se unlawful to enter into a credit agreement under an assumed name and does the credit provider bear any responsibilty if they do not make sufficiently thorough checks of identity etc. before entering into an agreement?

probably. bearing in mind banks etc. obligations under the money laundering etc regs. and probably also bearing in mind the offence of obtaining money by deception (the deception being as to your identity).

My reaction was that this is an offence under one of the Theft Acts, either obtaining property by deception which comes under the 1968 Theft Act (was it s 15? It was a long long time ago), or obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception which comes under the 1978 Act. The latter was specifically enacted to deal with people who get a credit facility (such as a credit card or draw-down loan) even if they don't actually use it.

Hmmm. Doesn't it depend on the person's intention whether it actually was deception? If the person intended to use that name for their dealings with that card and did so then has an offence been committed? So far as I know, there is no legislation prohibiting someone from using whatever name they want to use, nor to prohibit them from using different names for different purposes. (The latter is quite common for women who use their single name - or a previous married name - for business, and their married name in their personal life.)

using an assumed name to obtain credit is totally different, IMHO, to using one's maiden name after marriage... a woman's maiden name is, after all, her name

and whilst one can change one's name (see another thread for that topic!) that again is totally different from "using an assumed name to obtain credit".

it may be the way OP put the original question, but as phrased, that's a crime..IMHO.

the implicatin is that the credit would not have been obtained had person's real name been used.

having said all that... banks etc. are supposed to demand enough ID to sink a battle ship these days, so one wonders how successful one would be unless ALSO having lots of fraudulent ID docs about the place...

Thanks everyone for your thoughts, in reply to Clair the client appears to have use an assumed name to open four bank accounts and take out a number of credit arrangements. I don't know if the credit would have been obtained under the persons real name as I have no proof of income at the time but judging by their present circumstances I honestly doubt that they have ever had the annual income they seem to have stated on the credit agreements.

The only thing that may have happened is that some earlier bank accounts were taken out in the correct name and then had the name changed later, there doesn't appear to be anything to prevent someone doing this if they want to.Using these it might just have been possible to open new accounts on the strength of existing accounts and credit ratings in the new name, but surely the credit companies would have wanted to see a payslip or two!

As the Welfare Rights matter concerns proof of identity we have, with the cl's consent, written to the banks. I will have to take advice from our legal dept about how we proceed when we suspect that a crime may have been committed.

i'd get on to your legal department sharpish, then, before doing any more work and without talking to your client first ... you'll be aware of reporting requirements, no doubt (whilst you don't handle client money, still need to be careful ....)