Category Archives: News

Statutory Consultation on the Revision of PACE Codes

The Home office is undertaking a statutory consultation on the revision of PACE codes C, E, F and H, which cover detention and interviewing, audio recording, visual recording and terrorism.  The consultation closes on 6 December 2017.

THIS IS IMPORTANT for ALL INVESTIGATORS, as it covers recording by devices other than ‘normal’ interview recorders and explicit rights for suspects attending voluntary interviews.

There are draft versions of codes C, E, F and H to view which cover :

  • code C – the detention, treatment and questioning of persons detained under PACE
  • code E – the audio recording of interviews with suspects
  • code F – the visual recording of interviews with suspects
  • code H – persons detained under the terrorism provisions

Responses must be received no later than Wednesday 6 December 2017.  If you’re involved in investigations, don’t miss your chance to comment!

www.gov.uk/government/consultations/revising-pace-codes-c-h-e-and-f

Case Law : Guidance on Calculating Unlawful Profit Orders

Poplar HARCA v (1) Begum (2) Rohim – Neutral Citation Number: [2017] EWHC 2040 (QB)
The respondents were granted an assured tenancy of a two-bedroom flat in Poplar ; the rent was met in full by payments of Housing Benefit. During the course of the tenancy, they moved out of the property and sub-let it. They retained the ‘use’ of a single room, padlocked shut, in which they kept children’s belongings in an attempt to avoid detection in case of an inspection by the landlord. Following their sublet, they gained a rental income of £400 a month.

At the original trial, the landlord claimed that the Respondents had parted with possession of the entire property, thereby losing security of tenure (s.15A of the Housing Act 1988). (It also claimed the right to possession under grounds 10, 12, 14 of the HA.) The Respondents denied moving out of the flat, saying that they had left only to care for a sick relative and that they had received no money from the ‘relatives’ who were staying at the address. The Recorder found that the respondents had not parted with possession but made a suspended possession order on the other grounds. He refused to make a UPO, finding that the Respondents had not made enough from any sub-letting to meet the rental payments.

In addition to overturning the suspended possession order and granting possession to the landlord, His Honour Judge Turner, sitting in the High Court, gave the first guidance during an appeal decision in relation to the granting and calculation of an Unlawful Profit Order.

Get Housing Fraud Training

Section 5 of the Prevention of Social Housing Fraud Act (PoSHFA) says that (in simple terms) the amount of any order should be the income generated unlawfully less any rent actually paid. The first step is to determine the total amount the tenant received as a result of [the sublet] (or the best estimate of that amount). Next you must deduct from that amount the total amount, if any, paid by the tenant as rent to the landlord (including service charges) in relation to [the period during which the property was sublet]. In making his calculations, the landlord argued, the Recorder had accounted for the Housing Benefit as rent paid but not as income received ; this, they said, could not be correct.
The Judge agreed, holding that, the word, ‘total’ means that any income that arises from the ‘the dishonest relinquishment of possession’ should be considered as income received – to do otherwise would defeat the “obvious intention of Parliament to provide a mechanism with which to strip him of his spoils.”

Note to investigators : The judge’s words mean that any income derived from the property should be included in the calculation, so do look for benefits, grants, alterations etc., in compiling your figures.

Get Housing Fraud Training

View the full case on www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2017/2040.html

The Tenancy Fraud Forum (TFF)

John Bearcroft, TFF
June 2017

The TFF was launched in 2012 and is an independent organisation specifically dealing with Tenancy Fraud.  It is a National platform for the representatives of the numerous regional Tenancy Fraud Forums and for staff of Housing Providers strongly involved with the investigation of tenancy fraud to come together to raise awareness of this type of fraud, how to combat it and for the sharing of best practice.  The TFF main aim therefore, is to bring all Social Landlords together to work collaboratively to combat tenancy fraud.

The group meet approx. quarterly and discuss various issue regarding tenancy fraud including awareness campaigns, actions and successes, legal updates and, one of the most important tasks – the setting up of the TFF Conferences.  There have been two very successful, sold-out conferences to date, with a further Conference schedules for October 2017.  The Conferences have covered numerous fraud related issues such as identity verification, unlawful profit orders, Right-to-Buy Fraud, joint working and evidence gathering.

At present, 6 regional TFFs are represented, including members from London, Gloucestershire, Hereford & Worcestershire, Dorset, Oxford and Hampshire.  Work has also been carried out to assist groups in Cambridgeshire, Devon, Dorset, Essex, Hertfordshire, North West, Northern Ireland, South East London, South West London, Suffolk, Surrey, Swindon, Wales and West Midlands.  TFF members have also visited Scotland and Northern Ireland, providing advice and assistance on tenancy fraud and the benefits of setting up a regional group.  Support and information is also provided to groups and individuals regarding best practice and the setting up of more regional TFFs.

TFF - Tenancy Fraud Fourum

Information and advice is also given through a Yammer group on Housing, Tenancy and Proactive Fraud actions, including reports of successes and best practice.  Periodically, the TFF produces a publication ‘Knock. Knock’ which is full of news and tips to tackle tenancy fraud.  On some high level subjects, Counsel’s Opinion is obtained to provide information and legal advice on common, more complex issues.

The main purpose of the TFF is to reduce tenancy fraud and its impact on organisations and, more importantly, individuals who, due to fraud, are not able to obtain the assistance they need with their housing issues.  Social housing is very limited resource and therefore, it is important that it is fairly allocated to those in highest housing need and continues to assist the rightful tenants with their needs.

Get Housing Fraud Training

This year’s TFF Conference is being held in London on 26th October 2017.  The past Conferences have proved very popular and therefore. Early booking is essential.  Planned sessions included in this year’s Conference include Data Sharing, Money Laundering, dealing with short-term sub-lets/rentals, use of social media and the internet in gathering evidence, conducting interviews  and the work of the National Fraud Initiative.  There will also be numerous stands from key partners in the tackling of tenancy fraud. 

THE CONFERENCE IS NOW SOLD OUT

Don’t Mess with Listed Buildings!

Two home-owners, including a member of the Council, have been prosecuted by Wealden District Council for causing “irreversible changes” to a Grade 2 listed building. The changes to the 14th Century building, known as The Priest House which is in Hellingly, included the creation of a full height entrance hall through removal of ceilings and partitions, affecting the area for where there is anecdotal evidence for a priest hole; glazing of a partition; and removal of the barley twist bannisters and associated bannister rail to the staircase and replacing them with glazed panels.

Cllr Barby Dashwood-Morris, of the Priest House, Church Lane, Hellingly, pleaded guilty to six charges of causing works to be executed, for the alteration of the Grade II listed building, without obtaining the proper consent from the Council. Alan Proudfoot, of Goult in France pleaded guilty to four charges of making alterations to a listed building.

“The changes to this important listed building came to light when the owners attempted to sell the property,” said Kelvin Williams, Wealden’s District Council’s Head of Planning and Environmental Services. “Owners of historic properties should be aware of their responsibilities to the property and future generations. We will take action when necessary to protect the important heritage of our District.”

The District Judge at Brighton Magistrates Court on 3 May fined Cllr Dashwood-Morris £75,000 and ordered her to pay £40,000 towards the Council’s costs. Alan Proudfoot was fined £48,000 and was also ordered to pay £40,000 costs.

Get a Professional Qualification in Investigation