@abc123 - I agree and with hindsight I should have notified the DWP directly, however I believe that Mr.P has a valid point that WL has a contractual obligation to inform me at the time and notify the DWP seperately. If they had done this then I would not be in this position. In the matter of income vs expenses I, as with most people I expect, regard income as taxable monies received that can be used to replace normal living costs (i.e.replacethe need for benefits) and I did find this on another legal site "Disregarded income:some incomes are fully or partly disregarded when working out a person's income. These include: Attendance Allowance; Business expenses paid with salary; Charitable voluntary payments; Disability Living Allowance; Fostering payments; Child maintenance payments; Child Benefit". I did not receive any salary component (except for 1 instance as detailed above) and indeed in some cases te expenses were paid by a registered charity to enable my volunteer work. Unfortunately in my experience in dealing with the DWP I do not expect rational decisions... to be expected I suppose from an organisation that forces the most vulnerable in society to use a premium rate phone service to even make contact! Thanks for the input

Much appreciated Mr. P... I think that it is clear that my principle mistake was in assuming that in notifying WL I was automatically notifying DWP which would have been the case if the supervisor had followed the guidelines (Ch.5 sect 1). In the main the expenses (national) have been simple mileage allowance and on 1 occasion there was a hotel cost of £55. The international trip was to Nigeria (def not a holiday destination;) and the company did in fact pay for flights and visa fees directly. The expense payments were to cover hotel. travel and security arrangements while i was there. I did take advantage of the trip to also catch up with contacts for my volunteer charity projects and to explore job opportunities with some old and new connections. There are a number of other institutions and agencies who have indeed paid my expenses for UK travel to and from meetings/interviews by covering the cost directly and these were discussed with WL however as there is no record of payments for these trips the DWP has not queried. I can demonstrate that my 'back to work' strategy is beginning to pay off... my volunteering to give lectures at a UK university has recently resulted in my being asked to deliver 2 further lectures for which I was paid expenses and a fee. Fortunately my WL supervisor has been transferred and the day I actually received the payment, which for the first time included what I would regard as 'income' I notified WL and was then correctly advised to contact the jobcentre which I did the following day. I do not have any concerns regarding allegations of fraud and believe I can demonstrate that I have been transparent in my intentions and actions. I have some concern over the interpretation of what is and isnt regarded as notification and indeed having survived the ATOS assessment and appeal process I am cynical about any DWP 'decision making but primarily I am very concerned about how tis matter has been handled so far. it all stems from anonymous call which while it is impossible to trace the source it is 99% likely to be an extension of an ongoing neighbor dispute (malicious calls to local council and housing association etc) and while I recognize (if not agree) that the DWP will follow these 'tip-offs' not only is it embarrassing that prior to even discussing the situation they contact past (and potentially future) clients and employers. I have made a considerable effort and indeed on many occasions used my limited financial resources to create and maintain a professional reputation in the hope of securing work. Fortunately in my case they were only able to contact 1 company with which I have had an excellent relationship over many years so their receiving a letter from DWP FRAUD INVESTIGATION DEPT. did little harm. Again.. many thanks

I attended a DWP compliance interview last week and apparently following an anonymous call in June 2013 the DWP fraud investigation dept had checked my bank account and contacted previous employers. I wasn't concerned as I can account for all payments into my account and indeed I have not been paid any salary for any work. The problem arises over 'expenses'... prior to my current medical condition... limited mobility and poor circulation/severe cramps... I worked overseas as a project designer/manager for private companies and charities. After successfully navigating the ATOS process I was put with Working Links. During my last interview at the Jobcentre before going onto WL I was told that given my age and disability my best course of action would be to just tread water until i could apply for early retirement (I am 61). My WL supervisor while accepting that the likelihood of getting part time work 'shelf stacking' was zero was nevertheless positive that I could use my experience and extensive contact network to create a consultancy/advisory job that was flexible enough for me to manage. I wont go into the details for now but this involved a number of national and international trips to meet with past and potentially future clients. Fortunately i do ave a good reputation and a number of potential clients were happy to pay my travel and accommodation expenses. The DWP are now suggesting these expenses are in fact income and tat i should ave advised them of a 'change in circumstance' My point (and my question) is that I had no direct contact with DWP but clearly informed my WL supervisor of every stage of the game.. in fact I was actively encouraged. I was never advised by WL to separately inform the DWP and indeed during my first compliance interview the interviewer conceded that WL should have done this (apparently it isnt the first time this has happened) Of course it is impossible to find out the contractual obligations between DWP and WL but in my world if I am appointed as a supervisor then I have a duty of care to ensure that all aspects of the service are correct. My first question is simply do I have a valid argument that I did in fact provide the information (albeit to a nominated supervisor) and secondly... the DWP are suggesting that expenses are 'income' when in fact it can be shown that the sums were reasonable and from an income tax standpoint allowable. In my understanding income means taxable and disposable i.e. it can be used to pay the fuel bill and buy groceries etc is this the case? would appreciate any comments/advice that could help thanks