Tax Credit Casualties Forum
Tax Credit Casualties Forum
Home | Profile | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 HMRC Fraud
 Corruption in HMRC
 Forum Locked
 Printer Friendly
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  

Forum Admin

373 Posts

Posted - 31/12/2007 :  01:43:58  Show Profile Send familytaxcredit a Private Message
I believe corruption in HMRC is the key to lost data:

Analyse: HMRC say data is ‘lost in the post’?
The police cannot find the discs.
Just think for a while, it should easily be found, no problem.
Even if lost, it would be found eventually

The police spent several weeks looking for them? With no results?

HMRC/Government want you to believe a simple mistake, lost data?

Oh no, I don’t buy that explanation. ‘lost in the post’

The data is almost certainly stolen and organised within the ranks of HMRC/Government offices.

It is quite obvious to me how and why the government played this down.

The outcome of this will not be seen for several years in the future.

Google AdSense

Mountain View

Ali M-W

3558 Posts

Posted - 22/07/2008 :  08:04:52  Show Profile Send Ali M-W a Private Message

10:30 - 14 July 2008

A corrupt tax official siphoned off more than £116,000 of the public's cash into her family's bank accounts.

Mother-of-three Daksha Saujani (47) exploited her position of trust while managing a team at the Inland Revenue's Family Tax Credit department.

The crimes financed "a lifestyle she wasn't entitled to" and enabled her to send her youngest son to private school.

Leicester Crown Court was told that Saujani, of Harrowgate Drive, Birstall, "hijacked" innocent claimants' money using her work's computer and diverted it to her own bank account, her husband's and that of one of her sons.

She also forged new claims in the names of unsuspecting acquaintances and sat back as the money rolled in, even after she stopped working for the tax office. Saujani - who was said to have been "angered" that she had been charged with the offences - pleaded guilty to nine counts of cheating the revenue out of a total of £116,449 between 2003 and 2005.

She looked astonished when Judge Simon Hammond jailed her for two years for her "greed".

Adam Budworth, prosecuting, said the dishonesty came to light after an auditor detected that suspicious payments, processed by the defendant, were being channelled into the same bank accounts.

He said: "It wasn't a fraud to alleviate hardship but to support her lifestyle."

Saujani was employed by the Inland Revenue in Leicester for three different periods between 2002 and 2005 and became a "trusted manager", dealing with claims for Family Tax Credits and Working Tax Credits, the judge said.

He said he thought it was "despicable" that in carrying out the crimes, Saujani had diverted cash into the account of her "clearly innocent" son, who was then aged 14 or 15.

Judge Hammond said: "Between June and September, 2003, the claims were set up and payments continued until February, 2005.

"It was done to sustain a lifestyle and one of her children was privately educated.

"She's unable to account fully for what she did with the money and sought to minimise her behaviour.

"She says the Government loses lots of money through poor administration and seemed angered she'd been charged - and that doesn't smack of remorse to me.

"She's an intelligent woman and spotted a flaw in the system and exploited it. Tax credits are for the needy, not the greedy. It was a gross breach of trust and she exploited her position over a period of time.

"It was well planned, sophisticated and skilfully set up.

"People who abuse their position of trust in this way inevitably go to prison."

The court heard that Saujani's husband was also questioned, but the defendant exonerated him or anyone else of any involvement in the scam.

There is an asset confiscation hearing pending and they face losing the family home.

Gary Bell, defending, said Saujani had no previous convictions and ended up in debt from a failed business venture.

He said: "She used the money on debt and also to lead a lifestyle she wasn't entitled to.

"It has effectively ruined her life. She was a respectable person with no criminal background. She made full admissions when interviewed. She's suffered a great deal of remorse and shame."

You must be logged in to see this link.

Another reason why inserting "claimant" in front of "fraud and error" is as inaccurate as it is unjust. Time for HMRC to be up-front with how much truly is our fault and how much isn't. They don't like to, of course, as if they did, a full write-off would be on the cards for ALL their innocent victims.

Trinity: The answer is out there… and it's looking for you, and it will find you if you want it to.
Go to Top of Page

Rank; Hector Tax Inspector

40 Posts

Posted - 09/08/2009 :  04:21:06  Show Profile Send LittleLady a Private Message
In any organisation of over 100,000 people, with access to tax systems that can pay or repay money, there will be a small number of people who will try to divert money for personal gain. There are stringent systems in place to monitor potential fraud, which is probably how the above case got found out - and others like it.

As for the missing discs, that's a whole different issue, which when you consider the millions of items sent internally within HMRC (using an external courier company) was probably bound to happen sooner or later.

After a national search of every single desk and inch of HMRC office space in the country was undertaken, and presumably all the mail hubs in between, aren't you glad that more of our tax money wasn't spent chasing red herrings, but instead that a coherent and strict data transference policy was put in place nationally? What would you have done to try and find the CDs? When would you have stopped looking?
Go to Top of Page


7 Posts

Posted - 12/08/2009 :  08:03:38  Show Profile Send n/a a Private Message
Hi Littlelady. No-one expects HMRC to operate perfectly, never to lose items, never to make mistakes, never to need to tighten up security or punish the fraudulent amongst its ranks. What rankles, however, is the “one rule for HMRC, another for claimants” mentality. Thus, whenever HMRC has been asked to account for huge losses within the system, it has used the term “fraud and error” and then slapped the word “claimant” cleverly on the front. In other words, all the errors are ours, and all the fraud is ours. I am sure you can see why we might be a bit miffed at such assertions, especially since HMRC has never carried out any quantitative research on where the errors lie (and even if they did, how impartial would it be, with their tendency to act as judge and jury in their own cause?)

Thus when the same organization that is forever telling claimants, “We can’t write off that overpayment as no trace exists of that phone call in which you apparently asked us if your payments were right and we assured you that they were – because in our view that call cannot be traced and must never have been made” is exposed as losing many thousands of pieces of personal information, or of destroying millions of unread letters, or of losing hundreds and thousands of tax records, of course we point a finger at them. Funny how a single call gets lost and that just means it’s our fault. Yet twenty five thousand national insurance numbers and family details go missing, and that’s just the poor junior post boy’s fault. Convenient, we think.

If HMRC would only admit that sometimes the organization is at fault, not the individual, that would increase our trust far more than expensive advertising campaigns aimed at increasing tax credit take up. Let’s see “claimant fraud and error” broken down alongside “system error and HMRC employee/outsider fraud” so that can be clear about one thing – not everything is the claimant’s fault!

Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 Forum Locked
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Tax Credit Casualties Forum © 2005-10 Tax Credit Casualties Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000
RSS Feed 1 RSS Feed 2
Powered by ForumCo 2000-2008
TOS - AUP - URA - Privacy Policy