Decision details

1.         To approve the revised and updated Sanction and Prosecution Policy (Appendix A)

2.         To note the effects of the Welfare Reform Act 2012 and the Council Tax Reduction Schemes (Detection of Fraud & Enforcement) (England) Regulations 2013 on benefit customers who commit benefit fraud.

The Executive Member for Resources, Policy and Performance presented a confidential report which highlighted legislative changes which affected the amount of an Administrative Penalty

The report explained the changes and implications for customers who accepted an offer of an Administrative Penalty as an alternative to criminal proceedings and made Members’ aware of aspects of the Welfare Reform Act 2012 and Council Tax Reduction Schemes (Detection of Fraud & Enforcement) (England) Regulations 2013 which impacted on those who committed Housing Benefit, Council Tax Benefit and Council Tax Support fraud.

Decision made

1.         Approval granted to the revised and updated Sanction and Prosecution Policy (Appendix A)

2.         To note the effects of the Welfare Reform Act 2012 and the Council Tax Reduction Schemes (Detection of Fraud & Enforcement) (England) Regulations 2013 on benefit customers who commit benefit fraud.

Reason(s) for decision

1.      The changes to the Sanction & Prosecution Policy give the option of a financial penalty being available for cases where fraud is attempted and there is no overpayment.

2.      The decision to prosecute or to offer a formal caution or an Administrative Penalty or in fact to take no action at all is still at the Council’s discretion.

3.      Where the offer of a sanction is appropriate the decision to offer a formal caution or an Administrative Penalty is heavily influenced by whether customer admits the offence at the interview under caution.

4.      Attached to this report is a flow chart (Appendix B) which illustrates how the policy is put into action. Although the policy may suggest criminal proceedings or the offer of a formal caution or Administrative Penalty, each case is considered individually with the most appropriate action being recommended for each case.

Alternative option(s) considered and rejected

The following options were considered but rejected.

·           Set a minimum overpayment for Administrative Penalties.

·           Set a minimum overpayment for both formal cautions and Administrative Penalties

·           Take no action where an alternative to prosecution is appropriate but the offer of a formal caution is not.

·           Adopting any of the above would restrict the Council’s discretion to take the most appropriate action in each case. The Council’s Sanction & Prosecution Policy would also be out of step with the Sanction and Prosecution Policy of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) if these options were adopted. This could lead to inconsistency when deciding what action to take in cases where there has been a joint investigation involving Chorley Council and DWP investigators.