Select a region
A local mum, who was denied income support for four months after being falsely accused of owing almost £50,000 in benefits overpayments, has opened up about what she describes as a "witch hunt" that left her "mental health on the brink".
Sarah* decided to share her story after the Social Security Minister recently rejected a recommendation to write off benefit overpayments arising from errors made by her department, claiming that it would be unfair.
This recommendation was one of 26 identified in the Health and Social Security Scrutiny Panel's review of the overpayment of Income Support benefits.
The 71-page report exposed how as many as one-in-five people on Income Support are being chased to give back overpayments – many of which resulting from errors made by the Government department responsible for handing them out.
It also shed light on the significant toll the situation has been having on islanders' mental health, with the impact "so severe in some cases that individuals have considered or attempted to take their own lives".
Pictured: Social Security Minister Elaine Millar last week confirmed that she is only accepting three of the report's 26 recommendations.
However, Social Security Minister Elaine Millar last week confirmed that she is only accepting three of the report's 26 recommendations.
"We are only acting on the ones that we know can make a positive improvement," she said.
"It’s important that we only commit to actions that we know are deliverable and will maintain the fairness and integrity of the benefits system."
In response to the panel's suggestion that any overpayments made due to an error on the Government's part should be written off, Deputy Millar said: "To introduce a policy of writing off additional benefit payments would increase the cost of Income Support to the taxpayer and would not be fair on other benefit claimants who have received the correct amount of benefit.
"Without an increase in funding allocation, this proposal could lead to benefit rates being reduced to maintain spending within budget."
However, Sarah* – who was falsely accused of being owed tens of thousands of pounds by Social Security – has described the Minister's refusal to accept the recommendation as “horrific”.
"You don't understand until you’ve walked in those shoes," she said.
"It's so morally wrong that innocent people are being penalised for the incompetency of the department.
"You have no disposable income when you reply on income support. You can’t do this to people."
Sarah knows all too well the distress that the Social Security Department's errors can cause, as she recently spent nine months disputing accusations that she had been overpaid £47,000.
She shared her story with Express in the hope that "it might give other people in a similar situation the confidence to stand up for themselves".
Pictured: Sarah was falsely accused of owing almost £50,000 in benefits overpayments in what she described as a "witch hunt" that left her "mental health on the brink".
In January of this year, two Social Security officers turned up unannounced at Sarah's house where she lives with her two young children.
"My first frustration was that there was no heads up," explained Sarah. "But I was really amicable with them.
"I invited them in for a chat and a cup of tea."
It transpired that the Social Security Department were there, as they believed that Sarah was in an interdependent relationship with the father of her two children, and therefore alleged that she had been incorrectly claiming benefits as a single parent.
She described their questions as "clever" and said that it felt like they were worded in "special terms" that could be "twist[ed] into evidence against you".
Amidst the interrogation, Sarah broke down crying whilst her two children sat at the top of the stairs listening.
She said: "There was no consideration or regard for the kids whatsoever, they just continued to question me."
Pictured: "There was no consideration or regard for the kids whatsoever, they just continued to question me."
Sarah then had to sign a statement of what she had told the officers, and also produce three years of bank statements.
"It just went on and on," she said. "I was on the phone hounding them but the day of the decision just kept being pushed further back."
In the middle of this, the Social Security staff member who was dealing with Sarah's case became ill, meaning that another worker then had to familiarise themself with her situation.
The department also questioned other members of Sarah's family about her private matters.
"I was an emotional wreck," she admitted. "It felt like I couldn’t move forward with this hanging over me.
“They have no compassion for anyone, you’re just a number in the system."
Social Security eventually concluded that Sarah was in fact in an interdependent relationship with the father of her children and said that she had therefore been overpaid income support.
She received a letter claiming that she owed £47,000.
Sarah immediately reached out to political representative Deputy Catherine Curtis for support.
A disappointing response from the minister to the review of income support overpayments. St H deputies spend lots of time dealing with these problems. I have never seen evidence of children’s welfare being considered. @GovJersey @deputyrobward @OCCJersey @ElaineMillarJsy pic.twitter.com/WJIx5xduwk
— Deputy Catherine Curtis (@DeputyCCurtis) November 21, 2023
Deputy Curtis took one look at the letter and realised that the calculation was "completely wrong", explained Sarah.
"They had miscalculated what they thought I owed by £25,000.
"It was then reduced to £22,000, but this is still a huge amount of money."
Sarah described how this left her "mental health on the brink".
"I was struggling to look after my kids," she said. "I couldn't answer the phone or get out of bed.
"My mum was threatening to call the police on me as she was worried I was going to harm myself."
Sarah admitted that suicide did cross her mind.
"I didn’t know how I was going to deal with the debt," she said.
With encouragement from Deputy Curtis, Sarah appealed the Social Security Department's decision, explaining that there was no financial proof of an interdependent relationship on the three years of bank statements that she had produced.
Pictured: "I didn’t know how I was going to deal with the debt."
In August – seven months after the first Social Security visit in January – it was decided that Sarah's case would be taken to a Tribunal.
Although her case was meant to be on hold whilst awaiting Tribunal, she was still being threatened with a summon to Petty Debts Court before Deputy Curtis intervened on her behalf.
In October, the Social Security Department eventually decided that Sarah was in fact not in an interdependent relationship.
Her case was closed before it reached Tribunal.
Due to the alleged debt, Sarah had not been receiving income support payments since July which had also left her in rent arrears with social housing provider Andium.
Social Security got in touch with her to repay what was owed since July, however Sarah had been working increased hours since then and asked for a reassessment to ensure she was not overpaid.
"The last thing I wanted was to be overpaid and then asked to pay back money," she said.
However, the Social Security department refused and paid Sarah £4,000 for the missed months of income support.
She later received a bill informing her that she had been overpaid, and now owed the department £1,000.
Sarah described the whole ordeal as "traumatic".
She said: "It's been the worst year of my life. It felt like a witch hunt, like they were out to get me.
"I'm now working 45 hours a week to try and get away from the system.
"Since day one, I’ve never had an apology for the whole thing."
Sarah now wants to use her story to encourage other to "reach out to people" if they believe that they are being told to pay back income support that they believe they were entitled to.
"It worries me that there are vulnerable people who might just pay whatever debt that the department say that they owe," she said.
"I don't even want an apology anymore. If my story can help someone else, that’s my aim now.
"I can’t change what happened to me, but maybe it can help give other people some confidence to ask for help."
Pictured: “Is this really how we want to treat our people when they need some help to keep going?” asked Deputy Catherine Curtis.
Deputy Curtis, who supported Sarah throughout the process, said: “This was a young woman who works hard in an essential job and keeps a lovely family home for her young children.
“All of us at some time in our lives may need to receive income support in order to survive. At other times we may be contributing through tax.
“Sarah was kept on edge for month after month while the department investigated, intrusively, her circumstances, then made an incorrect decision which put her into serious debt.
“Thankfully this was overturned but only after a huge amount of time and effort, which is something of which some of our more vulnerable members of the community might not be capable.
“Is this really how we want to treat our people when they need some help to keep going?”
*names have been changed to protect identities.
Gov will not write off benefit overpayments arising from system errors
FOCUS: "I broke down, hysterically crying… It was horrific”
Comments
Comments on this story express the views of the commentator only, not Bailiwick Publishing. We are unable to guarantee the accuracy of any of those comments.