If
the OIG is investigating, it means that there is suspicion of criminal conduct.
In a recent federal criminal case, the OIG started investigating and the person
receiving the benefits lied to the OIG investigator. This is a case example of
what not to do when contacted by the
OIG and when an investigation is pending.
The
facts are as follows. On May 24, 2000, the grandmother of Audrey Owens, an
attorney and retired deputy public defender for Riverside County, passed away.
Her Social Security benefits had been deposited into a bank account that had
her and her father’s name on the account. Ms. Owens took her dad’s name off the
account and changed the bank account address to her home. For the next 12
years, the benefits went into this bank account and Ms. Owens spent the funds.
Ms. Owens did not think about the fact that her grandmother would have been
over 100 years’ old in 2012.
In
August 2012, as part of a “centenarian project” OIG began investigating Ms.
Owens’ grandmother. The OIG was investigating all persons aged 100 years or
more who are receiving Social Security or SSI benefits to make sure they are
still alive. OIG could not locate Ms. Owens’ grandmother and therefore
suspended benefits. Later this fact was used to show that Ms. Owens would not
have ended the fraud on her own.
On August 30, 2012, OIG agents went to Ms. Owens’ home and spoke to a man and asked him where the grandmother was. This man said the grandmother was in Kansas City. On September 24, 2012, Ms. Owens agreed to speak to OIG agents without an attorney. Ms. Owens told some mistruths to the OIG agents – which is not uncommon for people interviewed without an attorney when they panick. Ms. Owens stated that the man the OIG met was a homeless man she took in from a church when in fact he was her husband. Ms. Owens also stated that she thought the funds that went into the account were from her father’s VA benefits. Another untruth.
On August 30, 2012, OIG agents went to Ms. Owens’ home and spoke to a man and asked him where the grandmother was. This man said the grandmother was in Kansas City. On September 24, 2012, Ms. Owens agreed to speak to OIG agents without an attorney. Ms. Owens told some mistruths to the OIG agents – which is not uncommon for people interviewed without an attorney when they panick. Ms. Owens stated that the man the OIG met was a homeless man she took in from a church when in fact he was her husband. Ms. Owens also stated that she thought the funds that went into the account were from her father’s VA benefits. Another untruth.
It
took the U.S. Attorney’s Office a year before filing a criminal complaint
against Ms. Owens. The total loss was just over $120,000 for benefits received
as well as Medicare premiums paid on the grandmother’s behalf.
During
this year, it would have been very helpful for Ms. Owens if she had started
repayment of these funds on her own before
she was charged. Unfortunately, it appears that nothing was done until just before sentencing. Once Ms.
Owens was charged, she plead open to the Court. By this time, she had retired
from the public defenders’s office.
At sentencing, Pretrial Services recommended 6 months. The government sought a sentence of 12 to 18 months. On June 2, 2014, Judge Phillips sentenced Ms. Owens to 1 year and 1 day (the extra day is a sentencing benefit to Ms. Owens for various reasons).
One thing that was done correctly here was repayment of restitution before sentencing. Ms. Owens wisely repaid all the funds to SSA except for $1,747 and this may have been a factor in the court not sentencing Ms. Owens to 18 months. If this had been a state court case rather than federal, there probably would not have been a state prison sentence for a first time offense where restitution was almost entirely repaid, however the federal system is much harsher on sentencing results for these type of cases -- especially when a professional is involved.
There is no question that lying to a government agent such as OIG makes matters much worse. It is better to refuse to be interviewed if the person cannot say anything without incriminating themselves. This is when someone should obtain an attorney for advice so they do not make such a terrible mistake that compounds problems. This can often lead to obstruction of justice charges or enhancements.
Posted by Tracy Green, Esq.
Phone: 213-233-2260
Email: tgreen@greenassoc.com
