Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34,Anonymous, for Donating to support the site

aiding and abetting fraud... or not

including wills and probate
didds
Lemon Half
Posts: 5219
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:04 pm
Has thanked: 3225 times
Been thanked: 1012 times

aiding and abetting fraud... or not

#341967

Postby didds » September 22nd, 2020, 2:50 pm

This is a purely hypothetical scenario though one I suspect may have occurred to somebody somewhere to do...

Company C employs employees E1, E2 etc.

Come lockdown and furlough X takes furlough for all the Es, but tells them that for the company to survive and thus their jobs they have to carry on working full time as before. All the Es are aware that they are under furlough but still working full time. All the Es understand this is to ensure they have jobs at all as its the only way X will survive.

This is presumably fraud - X takes the furlough but keeps everybody working.

Are all the Es also guilty of fraud, by aiding and abetting it / accessories to the fact.

This is as i say purely hypothetical so there are no "specifics" available... it was a chat about whether the Es were scot free if the farud was detected. I claim they cannot be free of any postential criominal prosecution. Other say they have no choice so they cant be held guilty.

cheers for any insights :)

didds

PinkDalek
Lemon Half
Posts: 6139
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:12 pm
Has thanked: 1589 times
Been thanked: 1800 times

Re: aiding and abetting fraud... or not

#341975

Postby PinkDalek » September 22nd, 2020, 3:24 pm

Not sure if the answer is precisely given in a previous topic on the subject (at DAK back in May) but you may wish to read this again (when you mentioned a non hypothetical situation ;) ):

viewtopic.php?p=308040#p308040

Clitheroekid
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2848
Joined: November 6th, 2016, 9:58 pm
Has thanked: 1384 times
Been thanked: 3759 times

Re: aiding and abetting fraud... or not

#342035

Postby Clitheroekid » September 22nd, 2020, 8:26 pm

Criminal law isn't my area, but I'd have thought that the employees would probably have a defence of duress. In any case, I think the CPS would decide it wasn't in the public interest to prosecute them.

One case I did hear about a few weeks ago was where two similar companies in the same business just agreed to exchange workforces. A Ltd put its 20 employees on furlough, and claimed their wages from the government, as did B Ltd. However, employees on furlough are quite entitled to be employed elsewhere, so the 20 employees of A Ltd went to work for B Ltd and vice versa.

Of course they were only paid minimum wage in each case, but as that wage was in addition to 80% of their normal wage they were more than happy. Their employers were equally happy, as they were only having to pay `their' employees minimum wage, which was a big saving on their usual wage bill. And all apparently quite legal.

I hasten to add that this was all hearsay. I don't know whether it was true, and I've not bothered to try and work out the economics or legalities of it, but I thought it was an interesting idea.

dspp
Lemon Half
Posts: 5884
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:53 am
Has thanked: 5825 times
Been thanked: 2127 times

Re: aiding and abetting fraud... or not

#342041

Postby dspp » September 22nd, 2020, 8:51 pm

didds wrote:This is a purely hypothetical scenario though one I suspect may have occurred to somebody somewhere to do...
didds


There are lots of folk in council departments and HMRC working flat out to track down such things at present. In a much more joined up way than is usual. There is a very high risk of getting caught.

regards, dspp

vagrantbrain
Lemon Slice
Posts: 316
Joined: November 17th, 2016, 7:12 pm
Has thanked: 112 times
Been thanked: 159 times

Re: aiding and abetting fraud... or not

#342044

Postby vagrantbrain » September 22nd, 2020, 9:08 pm

We had some staff furloughed briefly and it was a condition of the CJRS that positive confirmation was received from the employee that they agreed to be furloughed - if there was no record of the employee agreeing then perhaps claiming ignorance could be an option for the employees

didds
Lemon Half
Posts: 5219
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:04 pm
Has thanked: 3225 times
Been thanked: 1012 times

Re: aiding and abetting fraud... or not

#342190

Postby didds » September 23rd, 2020, 11:27 am

PinkDalek wrote:Not sure if the answer is precisely given in a previous topic on the subject (at DAK back in May) but you may wish to read this again (when you mentioned a non hypothetical situation ;) ):

viewtopic.php?p=308040#p308040



LOL! Id forgotten that! The discussion I had recently was hypothetcial because id forgotten Id heard that etc! LOL

that's obviously where I "got" it form I guess.

cheers!

didds

didds
Lemon Half
Posts: 5219
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:04 pm
Has thanked: 3225 times
Been thanked: 1012 times

Re: aiding and abetting fraud... or not

#342191

Postby didds » September 23rd, 2020, 11:29 am

Clitheroekid wrote:One case I did hear about a few weeks ago was where two similar companies in the same business just agreed to exchange workforces. A Ltd put its 20 employees on furlough, and claimed their wages from the government, as did B Ltd. However, employees on furlough are quite entitled to be employed elsewhere, so the 20 employees of A Ltd went to work for B Ltd and vice versa.....

...And all apparently quite legal.


i've certainly heard of businesses taking furlough and indeed furloughing that workforce not because they needed to at the time but in order to bank the money for use after furlough is ended to help bankroll the staff during a perceived lean time over winter

again - presumably perfectly legal.

didds

terminal7
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1897
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:26 pm
Has thanked: 223 times
Been thanked: 679 times

Re: aiding and abetting fraud... or not

#342210

Postby terminal7 » September 23rd, 2020, 12:10 pm

Furloughed employees may be able to work for another employer, providing it does not breach their contractual obligations with their current employer.

Individuals should only work outside of the hours they would normally work in their usual job.

Taking on a weekend or evening job may not breach obligations if your contract stipulates a 9am to 5pm working day.


Not as discussed above.

T7


Return to “Legal Issues (Practical)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests