It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.

The Department takes the prevention of fraud extremely seriously. Part of its strategy includes ensuring Universal Credit transactions are secure, including tackling loopholes fraudsters may seek to exploit, which sadly can target some of our most vulnerable claimants.

It is, however, important to recognise that the vast majority of advances on Universal Credit are legitimate and ensure those in need of financial support get the help they need during their transition to Universal Credit.

All claims where fraud may have been committed are investigated. We are committed to the use of penalties such as prosecutions and tough financial penalties, where appropriate, to discourage this fraudulent behaviour. The Department considers all cases on their own merits and decisions are made on the strength of the evidence provided.

Additionally, we have a dedicated team of investigators to address this issue, and are working with Social Media sites to shut down posts which promote this fraud. The Department also operates a policy of explicit consent to help reduce the risk of fraud by ensuring that our claimants’ data is kept safe from unscrupulous organisations and individuals.

The Department is also raising awareness of this issue through a campaign being run on social media to remind people of the importance of safeguarding their identity. We have also been working to further improve knowledge and awareness of advances fraud amongst Jobcentre and Service Centre staff and guidance has been issued to ensure that staff are aware how to refer cases of suspected fraud to the Department’s Counter-fraud team.

As a result of internal work within the Department and pre-work with social media companies to identify accounts and determine their fraudulent nature, the first Social Media account was closed on the 9^th July. We continue to work with social media sites to ensure any pages promoting benefit fraud are closed and have closed down 71 sites to date.

The Department takes benefit fraud very seriously and ensures that all cases are investigated thoroughly.

If a claimant has been the victim of fraud, and has not benefitted financially in any way, they will not be asked to repay the money. The Department considers all cases on their own merits and decisions are made on the strength of the evidence provided.

The Department remains committed to tackling the issue of fraudulent Universal Credit advance claims. We have set up a dedicated team of investigators to work on advances fraud cases, released a campaign on social media to raise awareness and remind people of the importance of safeguarding their identity and have been working with Social Media sites to shut down pages which promote this fraud, having shut down 52 so far.

If any claimant has concerns about the safety of their personal information, they should speak to a member of Jobcentre staff or get help from Action Fraud.

Both members of a couple are given individual notice at the time of taking out the advance, via their Universal Credit (UC) journal, which includes the amount of the advance and of their liability to repay the advance. They will also be alerted individually to this UC Journal entry via the contact details provided for each claimant.

The Department will consider all reported cases on their own merits and decisions are made on the strength of any evidence provided.

The Department is committed to bringing fraudsters to justice. Last year we, working alongside local authorities, recovered more than £1.1bn in fraud and error across all benefits and brought almost 5,000 prosecutions in 2017/18.

As of June 2019, the Department has received around 42,000 fraud referrals from staff relating to potential fraudulent advance claims, which equates to less than 1 per cent of all Universal Credit claims.

Our investigations are ongoing and we are therefore unable to provide details of how many may have used another person’s identity to make their claim, or to quantify the amount spent on investigations of this type. However, any cases in which this has occurred will be treated accordingly, with the continued use of both prosecutions and tough financial penalties to deter this fraudulent behaviour.

Under Universal Credit (UC) claimants will only have one claim to benefit, whereas under Legacy, they may have made claims to multiple benefits. It is therefore not possible to draw a direct comparison between the caseloads of UC and Legacy benefits. UC will also incorporate Tax Credits which is currently administered by Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, who record their overpayments differently.

The Department is open and transparent about the cost of fraud and error in the benefit system, publishing our National “Fraud and Error in the Benefit System” statistics each year which detail the amount we estimate is lost to both fraud and error across all benefits.

Most welfare losses, across Government, arise from claimants failing to report changes of circumstances, Universal Credit (UC) provides a single, digital interface through which claimants can more easily report these changes. As such, once UC is fully rolled out, we expect cross-welfare losses to fraud, error and overpayments to be reduced by around £1 billion per year. UC also allows us to adjust benefit entitlement in line with changing circumstances in real time. Internal and external data matches are increasingly helping to inform benefit payments and alerting staff to check for any undeclared changes in people’s circumstances.

As of June 2019, the Department has received around 42,000 fraud referrals from staff relating to potential fraudulent advance claims, which equates to less than 1 per cent of all Universal Credit claims.

The Department is committed to bringing fraudsters to justice. Last year we, working alongside local authorities, recovered more than £1.1bn in fraud and error across all benefits and brought almost 5,000 prosecutions in 2017/18.

As of June 2019, the Department has received around 42,000 fraud referrals from staff relating to potential fraudulent advance claims, which equates to less than 1 per cent of all Universal Credit claims.

Our investigations are ongoing and we are therefore unable to provide details of how many may have used another person’s identity to make their claim, or to quantify the amount spent on investigations of this type. However, any cases in which this has occurred will be treated accordingly, with the continued use of both prosecutions and tough financial penalties to deter this fraudulent behaviour.

Advances are in place to ensure those in genuine need are able to receive financial support. They are not additional money: they are simply an advance of entitlement.

Either member of a couple can apply for an advance payment on behalf of the couple. Since both claimants have a joint and individual liability for the repayment of the advance, they are given written notice at the time of taking out the advance, via their Universal Credit (UC) journal, which includes the amount of the advance and of their liability to repay the advance. They will also be alerted to this UC Journal entry.

The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the Authority to reply.

The Home Office holds responsibility for the Joint Fraud Taskforce, while DCMS is responsible for policy on tackling nuisance calls.

The Joint Fraud Taskforce is working with industry to tackle Card Not Present Fraud, including fraudulent purchases made over the telephone. Since September 2016 the Government has been running the Take Five fraud awareness campaign designed to urge the public and businesses to take time to consider whether a situation they find themselves in is genuine. Specific advice on phone scams and vishing can be found at www.takefive-stopfraud.org.uk

There are existing measures that make it mandatory for all direct marketing firms to display their calling line identification - making it easier for people to identify direct marketing calls, and choose whether to accept them. In addition, Government has recently legislated in the Financial Guidance and Claims Act 2018 to further restrict direct marketing by placing a ban on cold calls offering to settle personal injury or payment protection insurance claims if the claimant has not chosen to ‘opt-in’.

The Government takes all types of fraud extremely seriously, including vishing. The Home Office holds responsibility for the Joint Fraud Taskforce and Action Fraud is the UK’s national reporting centre for fraud and cybercrime where fraud should be reported. Action Fraud has produced guidance on its website to help individuals and organisations prevent fraud.

Since 2010, we have sought to minimise the level of bureaucracy imposed on police forces, including through the collection of national data from forces. We have also introduced democratically PCCs to ensure resources are focused on local priorities. The Government is engaging with the police to better understand changes in demand.

None

Improving the law enforcement response to fraud is a priority for the Joint Fraud Taskforce where we are working with law enforcement to improve the local, regional and national response to fraud. All police forces have access to regional support through the Regional Organised Crime Units and national support from the City of London Police.

We recognise that local policing capabilities in respect of the investigation of digital crime need to be further developed to meet the challenges the police face tackling fraud or online abuse in the digital era. We are supporting the work of the National Policing Lead for Digital Investigation and Intelligence. We are also providing £4.6 million through the Police Transformation Fund to enable to police to improve digital capability, funding police led programmes that will work to equip forces with the tools to effectively police a digital age and protect victims of digital crime.

The police have increased their capability to record and respond to hate crime. This is reflected in the increase in police recorded hate crime. The police have also improved their training to staff on the identification, investigation and prosecution of hate crime.

The Government protected overall police spending in the 2015 Spending Review, and the 2017/18 police funding settlement maintains that commitment.

Every Police & Crime Commissioner who maximised their local precept income in 2016/17 and 2017/18 will receive at least the same direct resource funding in cash that they received in 2015/16.

Ministers make decisions on police funding to benefit policing as a whole. It is a matter for Chief Constables, working with their Police and Crime Commissioners, to manage their available resources according to local priorities. The Government does not assess police spending on each area of demand. However, I can confirm that we have provided over £2.5m to the City of London Police in respect of their lead force role in tackling fraud.

In its commentary on crime statistics the independent Office for National Statistics points to improved crime recording practice by police forces as an important factor in explaining increases in police recorded crime, which we welcome. HMIC’s rolling programme of crime data integrity inspections will keep the spotlight on forces to improve the accuracy of their crime recording.

The Government protected overall police spending in the 2015 Spending Review, and the 2017/18 police funding settlement maintains that commitment.

Every Police & Crime Commissioner who maximised their local precept income in 2016/17 and 2017/18 will receive at least the same direct resource funding in cash that they received in 2015/16.

Ministers make decisions on police funding to benefit policing as a whole. It is a matter for Chief Constables, working with their Police and Crime Commissioners, to manage their available resources according to local priorities. The Government does not assess police spending on each area of demand. However, I can confirm that we have provided over £2.5m to the City of London Police in respect of their lead force role in tackling fraud.

In its commentary on crime statistics the independent Office for National Statistics points to improved crime recording practice by police forces as an important factor in explaining increases in police recorded crime, which we welcome. HMIC’s rolling programme of crime data integrity inspections will keep the spotlight on forces to improve the accuracy of their crime recording.

I have been asked to reply on behalf of the Department for Work and Pensions.

The figures for England only are not available. The estimated levels of housing benefit fraud in Great Britain are as follows: (a) £250 million (1.2% of spend) in 2009-10, (b) £300 million (1.4% of spend) in 2010-11 and (c) £350 million (1.5% of spend) in 2011-12.

The information is derived from the 2012-13 preliminary estimates of benefit fraud and error. Further information can be found by accessing the following link:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/203097/nsfr-final-090513.pdf

I have been asked to reply on behalf of the Department for Work and Pensions.

DWP publishes a range of Housing Benefit Recovery and Fraud statistics at Local Authority level. These can be accessed here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-work-pensions/series/housing-benefit-recoveries-and-fraud-data

Specifically, the number of successful prosecutions is included in table 2.10 of the documents linked as follows:

2011-12 tables

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/223303/hbrf_1012.xls

2010-11 tables

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/223304/hbrf_1011.xls

2009-10 tables

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/223305/hbrf_0910.xls