HC Deb 02 July 1996 vol 280 cc403-6W
Mr. Frank Field

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) if he will make a statement on the organisation of the work of the Benefits Agency's internal fraud investigators; [33788]

(2) how many Benefits Agency staff have been (a) disciplined, (b) suspended or (c) dismissed for matters relating to benefit fraud in the period 1 April 1995 to 31 March 1996; [33782]

(3) how many Benefits Agency staff have been prosecuted for matters relating to benefit fraud in the period 1 April 1995 to 31 March 1996; what were the charges laid and their outcome; how much benefit was defrauded in each case; what was the grade and office location of the Benefits Agency of each employee involved; and how many such employees were employed in offices at (a) local, (b) headquarters and (c) other levels. [33783]

Mr. Heald

Internal fraud investigations in the Benefits Agency are the responsibility of area directors and their equivalents, and the personnel services manager for Beenefits Agency central services.

Each director has specially trained investigators who conduct investigations into staff working in the directorate. In addition to full-time permanent investigators, directors have panels of trained investigators, normally employed on other duties, who can be called on to assist in investigations when necessary. Often the panel members will have expertise in a particular area.

The Benefits Agency security branch provides a central support and co-ordinating function for investigators throughout the agency.

Disciplinary and prosecution action is also the responsibility of area directors and their equivalents within the agency. Disciplinary action taken specifically as a result of benefit fraud is not distinguished from that taken for other reasons in central records.

Details of staff suspended are not recorded as suspension is an interim measure taken by managers pending the conclusion of investigative action.

Information is, however, collated centrally relating to the prosecution and disciplinary action taken as a result of area directors' investigations.

Involvement of staff in benefit fraud is viewed very seriously by the Benefits Agency, and will result in dismissal and prosecution when proven.

The figures in the table relate to disciplinary action taken between 1 April 1995 and 31 March 1996 as a result of area directors' investigations, where the investigation identified benefit-related fraud. This includes cases where members of staff were found to be "living together as husband and wife" with benefit customers, where such action resulted in a fraudulent benefit claim. The figures do not include cases where officers resigned.

Number
Benefits Agency staff dismissed for involvement in benefit related fraud 10
Staff receiving other penalties for involvement in benefit related fraud 0

Figures are not kept centrally relating specifically to prosecutions arising from benefit fraud.

The cases listed in the list are those prosecutions resulting from area directors' investigations in the Benefits Agency, and which were completed between 1 April 1995 and 31 March 1996, which involved any benefit. This includes misappropriation of instruments of payment, and frauds which involved misuse of the benefits administration system rather than false benefit claims.

  • Case 1
  • Charge: Not recorded
  • Amount defrauded: £2,655.22
  • Outcome: 10 months-imprisonment
  • Office location: London Central District
  • Grade: Local Officer II
  • Level of employment: Local
  • Case 2
  • Charge: False accounting, deception
  • Amount defrauded: £2,261.61
  • Outcome: 240 hours community service
  • Office location: Hackney and Islington District
  • Grade: Local Officer II
  • Level of employment: Local
  • Case 3
  • Charge: Conspiracy to defraud
  • Amount defrauded: £153,467.70
  • Outcome: 18 months imprisonment
  • Office location: South Downs District
  • Grade: Local Officer II
  • Level of employment: Local
    • 405
  • Case 4
  • Charge: Theft and deception
  • Amount defrauded: £7,855.75
  • Outcome: Six months imprisonment
  • Office location: West Hertfordshire District
  • Grade: Local Officer II
  • Level of employment: Local
  • Case 5
  • Charge: Conspiracy to defraud
  • Amount defrauded: £79,803.28
  • Outcome: Two officers were charged—both were acquitted
  • Office Location: Newham District
  • Grade: Local Officer II
  • Level of employment: Local
  • Case 6
  • Charge: Theft
  • Amount defrauded: £20,495.53
  • Outcome: BA employee sentenced to three years imprisonment. Seven external accomplices were also charged: three were cautioned, three were sentenced to community service, and one received six months probation.
  • Office location: Sefton District
  • Grade: Local Officer II
  • Level of employment: Local
  • Case 7
  • Charge: conspiracy to defraud
  • Amount defrauded: £9,953.51
  • Outcome: Charges against officer dropped by CPS. Co-conspirator sentenced to 18 months imprisonment.
  • Office location: Birmingham Chamberlain District
  • Grade: Local Officer II
  • Level of employment: Local
  • Case 8
  • Charge: Not recorded
  • Amount defrauded: £36,348.67
  • Outcome: Two years imprisonment
  • Office location: Oxfordshire District
  • Grade: Local Officer II
  • Level of employment: Local
  • Case 9
  • Charge: Conspiracy to defraud
  • Amount defrauded:£59,000.00
  • Outcome: Officer sentenced to two and a half years imprisonment. External accomplice sentenced to one years imprisonment.
  • Office location: Hackney and Islington District
  • Grade: Location Officer II
  • Level of employment: Local
  • Case 10
  • Charge: Conspiracy to defraud
  • Amount defrauded £34,094.50
  • Outcome: Four months imprisonment
  • Office location: Palace District
  • Grade: Local Officer II
  • Level of employment: Local
    • 406
  • Case 11
  • Charge: Not recorded
  • Amount defrauded: £15,901.14
  • Outcome: Two and a half years imprisonment
  • Office location: Birkenhead District
  • Grade: Local Officer II
  • Level of employment: Local

Mr. Simpson

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what amounts were spent by the Government on the detection of benefit fraud in(a) 1993–94 and (b) 1994–95. [34031]

Mr. Heald

In 1993–94, over £70 million was allocated for the detection of benefit fraud. In 1994–95, the allocation increased to over £77 million.