Hello, can anyone answer this one?

If HB Office have suspended HB while they are investigating the HB claim for suspected fraud, do you know how long they have before they have to make a decision on the claim, especially where the claimant knows nothing about the investigation, or where they have provided everything they have been asked to provide?
Does this come under the guidance about making a decision within a calendar month after suspension, or is it different when its a fraud investigation?
Also, do you know if/when the claiamant has to be told that its being suspended because of suspected fraud?
thanks

I don't think (although I remain open to correction!) that there is a time limit as such. The authority however must have continuing reason to beleive that the claimant is not entitled pending a full decision. The authority's duty is to make reasonably diligent enquiries to resolve the matter as soon as possible and to either make a decision or restore the benefit, a kind of "charge or release me" situation!. If they take too long, or continue the suspension without reason, they are potentially open to Judicial review or an LGO complaint. If it has been ongoing for a while and you can't get a satisfactory explantion, a pre action JR letter may help to focus the issue!

"...do you know if/when the claiamant has to be told that its being suspended because of suspected fraud?.."

I dont think they would have to be told at all if such information might be a "tip off" and the claimant could, for example, destroy evidence.

thanks S Lloyd!
You mention a " pre action JR letter ". I have never carried out a Judicial Review or sent such a letter. Do you have a version I could look at, or refer me to a source? thanks

Pre action protocol for Jr is here:

http://www.dca.gov.uk/civil/procrules_fin/contents/protocols/prot_jrv.htm

Hi - I am surprised that the claim is suspended at this point, but I presume it depends how far down the line the investigation is. We have a duty to protect the public purse, but also you cannot deprive people of benefit without pretty clear evidence. Personally I would want strong evidence of any 'wrongdoing' before I suspended a claim, and 99% of the time I would interview the customer to see what they say before taking a decision on the benefit.
The only caveat to this would be non-residency situations where by the very nature it is hard to interview the claimant (because they don't live there) so you have to make a decision at some point to suspend benefit pending contact from customer.

hope this helps............

thanks everyone