Benefit Frauds - Are Existing Punishments Too Lenient?

Benefit fraud, a topic that has generated lot of media frenzy in the UK, is basically the act of claiming money falsely from the government. The Department of Work and Pensions in the United Kingdom has initiated a campaign through the visual media against this act of defrauding the government by making false claims for state aid. The slogan "No ifs, No buts" is used by this campaign to raise awareness among people. A few examples of this fraud are where people hide information about their earnings or capital, claims made on unoccupied property, and also people claiming to be living alone by hiding information about the people they live with.

If there is any suspicion of fraud, it could be reported to one's local council or the Department of Work and Pensions. Most of the local councils, as well as the DWP, have websites where one can submit any information that needs to be investigated. Though, the cost involved in supplying material evidence to the DWP like the postage cost should be borne by the person themselves. Those guilty of the fraud are prosecuted under the Theft Act 1978 or Social Security Administration Act 1992. The Fraud Act of 2006 has brought more offences under its purview for fighting this crime comprehensively.

The investigation of the fraud can be done not only by the Department of Work and Pensions, but also the councils investigating the Housing and Council Tax Benefit Fraud. However after the introduction of Welfare Reform Act of 2007, UK councils are empowered to conduct independent scrutiny of many Social Security Benefits. The DWP's policy on unsubstantiated allegations states that checks will be conducted on the basis of referrals and no action will be taken against someone found not guilty in previous investigations, except when there is a different allegation or new information.

The DWP or the UK councils apply three sanctions, which include cautions, prosecution and administrative penalties on those who are found guilty of fraud. Simple cautions are offered to those who have admitted their offence, and apart from this there is no statutory framework regarding this matter and is entirely dependent on the policy of the pertinent authority.

The DWP has a national policy whereas the local councils have their own policy and the guidelines and criteria could differ for each council.
The administrative penalty imposed on fraudsters is a fine in accordance with Section 115 of the Social Security Administration Act 1992, fixed at 30 percent of the amount overpaid by the state to them. In order to be offered an Administrative Penalty there is no need for the suspect to admit their guilt; when the offer is refused this measure should only be taken only if the Local Council or the DWP has enough proof for court proceedings.

A suspect is brought under prosecution for extreme benefit fraud cases when he has been committing fraud for too long, when an exorbitant amount has been overpaid to him as benefit, when committed by him while holding a position of trust, or for a barefaced fraud.