fraud by abuse of position

Go down

fraud by abuse of position

Post by Admin on Sun Apr 16, 2017 1:12 pm

[quote="FlyingVisitor" post=27036]ABC

4 Fraud by abuse of position
(1) A person is in breach of this section if he—
(a) occupies a position in which he is expected to safeguard, or not to act
against, the financial interests of another person,
(b) dishonestly abuses that position, and
(c) intends, by means of the abuse of that position—
(i) to make a gain for himself or another, or
(ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

(2) A person may be regarded as having abused his position even though his
conduct consisted of an omission rather than an act.

Fact: If claimants give a access to their UJ accounts they are more likely to be sanctioned. Therefore, if a JC official notifies a claimant that access to their UJ account is mandatory or, they place a requirement in their CC, the person is exposed to risk of loss.

The DWP promotes the benefits of giving access, but does not inform the claimant of the risks; this is fraudulent.

The gain for himself could be a performance award, the gain for another is the Treasury.

The H & WP has started

FOI request.

Which of the ten devolution deal areas are your 10 work and health pilots going to be?
Which Local Authorities are involved in the pilots co-design/co-commission?

The Department is currently working with ten areas, rather than developing pilots. These
areas have a Devolution Deal that includes employment and include Cardiff Capital
Region which is a City Deal area. The nine areas that have devolution deals are: East
Anglia; Greater Manchester; London; Liverpool; North East Combined Authority;
Sheffield; Tees Valley; West of England and West Midlands.

It might be mandatory for UC claimants under the work preparation requirement as there is no definition of a scheme n UC legislation.

It is definitely not mandatory for JSA claimants at this time as I've helped someone with this query.

RE cookies:

To clarify, raise an FOI and ask if UJ cookies have already been accepted by DWP on provider PC's and are they classified as DWP IAD's?[/quote]


Posts : 1487
Points : 3097
Reputation : 151
Join date : 2017-04-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum