× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Other benefit issues  →  Thread

Can an agreement to a formal caution be retracted?

Brian JB
forum member

Advisor - Wirral Welfare Rights Unit, Birkenhead

Send message

Total Posts: 472

Joined: 18 June 2010

The title says it all really.

I have a client who went to the USA whilst on income support, three times on holidays paid for by the family, and once because her father was seriously ill. She was not entitled to income support during the first absence as she had not been incapable of work for 364 days. Thereafter, on one holiday she was about 6 days over the 4 week limit and when her father was ill, about 7 weeks over.

Without telling us, she was called in for a second interview by Fraud and was offered a caution. She said that she told the interviewing officer she had not acted dishonestly, but still ended up signing for the caution. I do not think she actually realised what it meant until I explained it to her.

She vehemently disagrees that she is guilty of any charge, and in fairness I can’t think there is much of a case to bring against her.

She has asked me to write to retract the agreement to a caution and I have done. However, I cannot find anything that indicates that she can do so, although I can see that she can withdraw her agreement to a financial penalty.

Apologies if this is fairly easy to find, but I may be missing the wood for the trees

Brian

nevip
forum member

Welfare rights adviser - Sefton Council, Liverpool

Send message

Total Posts: 3139

Joined: 16 June 2010

CPAG, page 1086, heading “whether to accept a caution”, second bullet point:

“Accepting a formal caution is an admission of guilt.  Once you’ve accepted a caution you cannot change your mind”.

On the previous page it states “the cautioning system is not laid down in regulations but is based on the established guidelines for the police practice of cautioning”.  Makes sense really.

PolicyPrincess
forum member

Operations & Advice Manager - Citizens Advice Taunton

Send message

Total Posts: 427

Joined: 28 June 2010

Bhatt Murphy Solicitors successfully challenged a police caution issued on the grounds that the police did not have sufficiently clear evidence or admissions to administer the caution. The court issued guidelines on future conduct in such cases and the caution has been expunged form our client’s record.

Case is: R (on the application of RUPERT WYMAN) - and - THE CHIEF CONSTABLE OF HAMPSHIRE CONSTAULARY

On Bailii see… http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2006/1904.html

nevip
forum member

Welfare rights adviser - Sefton Council, Liverpool

Send message

Total Posts: 3139

Joined: 16 June 2010

Thats a very useful decision Mr Chaos, or may I call you Altered.  Duly saved to file.

ClaireHodgson
forum member

Solicitor, CMH solicitors, Tyne And Wear

Send message

Total Posts: 186

Joined: 17 June 2010

Andyp4 - 09 December 2010 04:46 PM

I would choose Sister Chaos rather than Mr Chaos if i were you Paul.

agree with that!

PolicyPrincess
forum member

Operations & Advice Manager - Citizens Advice Taunton

Send message

Total Posts: 427

Joined: 28 June 2010

Glad to have (finally) been of some use on rightsnet.
I have got to pick a better name to use (although I quite like ‘sister chaos’)

ClaireHodgson
forum member

Solicitor, CMH solicitors, Tyne And Wear

Send message

Total Posts: 186

Joined: 17 June 2010

Altered Chaos - 09 December 2010 09:29 PM

Glad to have (finally) been of some use on rightsnet.
I have got to pick a better name to use (although I quite like ‘sister chaos’)

trouble is, you have to reregister.  i need to reregister having moved firms, can’t just change the firm name on my profile!  and rather think tis the same for name change….