Findings
2.1 BFI is an integral part of the government’s strategy for tackling benefit fraud. Through our reports on Local Authorities (LAs) and DWP agencies we aim to:
· identify where improvements can be made within benefit administration to raise overall standards
· make recommendations to address weaknesses
· identify and spread good practice among administrators.
2.2 Information for this inspection was gathered from a range of sources, including:
· RBK
· DWP
· Jobcentre Plus offices
· the Rent Service (TRS)
· IA and DA.
2.3 Although key information was collected earlier, much of the detailed data was gathered during the on-site phase of the inspection from 25 March to 9 May during which time we interviewed staff and sampled the following cases:
· 30 new claim forms assessed between October and December 2001
· 30 renewal claim forms assessed between October and December 2001
· 30 overpayment cases, where the overpayment was identified between April 2001 and September 2001
· 40 fraud cases closed between April 2001 and February 2002.
2.4 All samples were randomly selected.
2.5 In this section we provide some basic information on RBK. In subsequent sections we report on:
· getting it right – making sure benefit payments are correct from day one
· keeping it right – ensuring payments are adjusted as circumstances change
· putting it right – detecting when payments go wrong and taking prompt action to correct them, with appropriate penalties to prevent a recurrence
· making sure the strategy works – monitoring progress, evaluating the strength of defences and adjusting them in the light of experience.
2.6 RBK is an outer London Borough that covers an area of 3,756 hectares in south west London. The main population centres, apart from Kingston itself, are Norbiton, Surbiton and Chessington. It has a population of 144,000 of whom 60,000 are Council Tax payers. RBK told us that the Borough is an affluent area with a booming private sector housing market. RBK is a low crime area. Metropolitan Police crime figures for the year ending 2001 show that for crimes involving fraud or forgery, Kingston upon Thames had the second lowest figures in London. For the total number of all crimes committed, Kingston upon Thames had the lowest crime figures in London.
Benefit expenditure and caseload
|
Fig. 2.1: HB and CTB caseload |
||
|
Year |
HB |
CTB |
|
1998/99 |
5,880 |
6,468 |
|
1999/2000 |
5,767 |
6,317 |
|
2000/01 |
5,915 |
6,522 |
Source: DWP Analytical Services Division (ASD)
2.7 Figure 2.1 shows that caseload for both HB and CTB had remained almost static in the last three years. RBK’s HB caseload is the 177th largest in the country.
|
Fig. 2.2: HB and CTB Gross Revenue Expenditure (£000) |
|||
|
Rent Allowance (RA) |
Rent Rebate |
CTB |
|
|
1998/99 |
13,694 |
10,957 |
4,394 |
|
1999/2000 |
14,390 |
10,695 |
4,725 |
|
2000/01 |
14,742 |
10,800 |
5,099 |
Source: RBK
2.8 In 2000/01 RBK paid out £30.6 million in HB and CTB. This represented some 20% of the Gross Revenue Expenditure (GRE) of £153 million for 2000/01. The breakdown of benefit expenditure is detailed in Figure 2.2.
2.9 For the three years up to 2000/01 RR expenditure remained more or less static at just under £11 million. RA expenditure went up by 7.7% and CTB went up by 16%.
2.10 RBK told us that this was because of upward pressure on private sector rents and increases in Council Tax. For example Council Tax rose by 13% in the year 2000/01.
RBK departmental structure
2.11 Council decisions in RBK were made by cabinet.
2.12 A programme of cabinet policy is produced each year and the Chief Executive and four directors have responsibility for transforming it into practice.
|
Fig. 2.3: Senior officer structure |
|
|
Source: BFI inspection
2.13 Figure 2.3 illustrates the senior officer division of responsibilities. The benefits section is part of RBK’s Finance department and incorporates all aspects of benefit administration as well as the HB Investigation team (HBIT).
2.14 During our on-site phase of the inspection the benefit administration structure changed slightly with the temporary introduction of a VF Champion team, comprising one group manager, one deputy group manager and 2 benefits officers, each drawn on a temporary basis from the normal organisation outlined in Figure 2.4. When phases one and 2 of the VF plan are fully implemented in June the organisation will revert back to this structure.
|
Fig. 2.4: Organisation of staff |
|
|
Source: BFI inspection
2.15 Between February 1997 and January 2000, an external contractor administered benefit for RBK. The counter fraud operation remained in-house during this period.
2.16 RBK were not satisfied with the level of service provided by the external contractor and in February 2000 brought the benefit administration back in-house.
2.17 Benefit administration staff and counter fraud staff are centrally located at the Guildhall complex in the town centre.