Forum Home → Discussion → Decision making and appeals → Thread
Appealing amount of overpayment after pleading guilty of benefit fraud ...
... Can a person continue with an appeal against the amount that the DWP are stating they have been overpaid if they have pleaded guilty at court while the appeal is ongoing ?
Have a good weekend all ...
... Can a person continue with an appeal against the amount that the DWP are stating they have been overpaid if they have pleaded guilty at court while the appeal is ongoing ?
Have a good weekend all ...
Yes, but I think that a realistic appraisal of the case is required at this point. There are other threads about the impact of criminal court decisions on an outstanding appeal (e.g. Tribunal or mags….here we go again), but I think that the fact that a person pleads guilty counts for a lot, as opposed to pleading not guilty, but being found so.
I dont think it is a very attractive stance to say “I lied when I pleaded guilty to save me from a prison sentence but i am now telling the truth when I say I didn’t do it”. And yes, I know that a decision to plead guilty is often on advice from a solicitor or barrister who might not have any idea of social security legislation (other than the criminal bits), and is done in the hope of a reduced sentence. We must remember that the legal advice given is on the basis that, in the experience of the solicitor / barrister, the client stands a pretty big chance of losing in the criminal case based on the evidence presented. They will know their courts better than those of us who do not practice there.
It may be that the charges to which he pleaded guilty did not cover the whole period of the overpayment - in plea bargain cases that is often the case. There may well then be part of the overpayment that is reasonably arguable at a tribunal - I had one such case recently in which the FTT accepted that the supersession of a DLA award should not have had effect earlier than the period for which he had pleaded guilty in the criminal case. Although originally of the view that he hadn’t done anything wrong (even after pleading guilty), the client saw the logic in not trying to push things for the period he had pleaded guilty to.
It all really depends on the case
Failure by solicitors dealing with the criminal side of benefit ‘fraud’ cases to advise claimants of their right to appeal against an overpayment decision may be an all to frequent occurance. We certainly get cases referred to us ‘at the last minute’ where a solicitor has been involved from an early stage (say at IUC) but has not advised the claimant of their right of appeal or referred to an advice agency. Solicitors apparent lack of knowledge of the right of appeal and overpayment legislation is astounding (but not surprising).
I don’t see the problem if the argument is “yes I agree I did deliberately not tell them but I think the figure they say I got is wrong”. It’s only a step away from what happens in OP appeals all the time: there is often a recoverable overpayment on the facts, but the amount claimed is way off. And the amount can be highly relevant to the issue of sentencing.
And the amount can be highly relevant to the issue of sentencing.
This is a good reason why, to come back to a recurring theme in this forum, it is usually preferable to have the tribunal before the criminal proceedings. What the case of “Wearing” shows is that it doesn’t work the other way round - i.e. a later tribunal decision (in that case completely changing the decision in her favour and cancelling the whole overpayment) does not enable even a successful challenge to a POCA decision, let alone the conviction and sentence already passed.