Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
As published
113 Penalty in respect of benefit fraud not resulting in overpayment
(1) Section 115A of the Social Security Administration Act 1992 (penalty as alternative to prosecution) is amended as follows.
(2) After subsection (1) there is inserted—
(1A) This section also applies where —
(a) it appears to the Secretary of State or an authority that there are grounds for instituting proceedings against a person for an offence (under this Act or any other enactment) relating to an act or omission on the part of that person in relation to any benefit, and
(b) if an overpayment attributable to the act or omission had been made, the overpayment would have been recoverable from the person by, or due from the person to, the Secretary of State or an authority under or by virtue of section 71, 71ZB, 71A, 75 or 76 above.
(3) In subsection (2)(a) for “such proceedings” there is substituted “proceedings referred to in subsection (1) or (1A) above“.
(4) In subsection (4)—
(a) in paragraph (a), after “is” there is inserted “ or would have been ”;
(b) in paragraph (b), at the end there is inserted “or to the act or omission referred to in subsection (1A)(a).“
(5) In subsections (6) and (7), at the beginning there is inserted “In a case referred to in subsection (1)”.
(6) In subsection (7B)(a), after “is”, in both places, there is inserted “ or would have been ”.
(7) In subsection (8) after “subsection (1)(a)” there is inserted “ or (1A)(b) ”.
(8) In the Social Security Fraud Act 2001—
(a) in section 6B(1)(b), the words “by reference to any overpayment” are repealed and for “the offence mentioned in subsection (1)(b) of the appropriate penalty provision” there is substituted “ the offence to which the notice relates ”;
(b) in sections 6C(2)(b) and (3), 8(7)(b) and (8) and 9(7)(b) and (8), for “the overpayment” there is substituted “ any overpayment made ”.
Your change, as a redline
113 Penalty in respect of benefit fraud not resulting in overpayment
(1) Section 115A of the Social Security Administration Act 1992 (penalty as alternative to prosecution) is amended as follows.
(2) After subsection (1) there is inserted—
(1A) This section also applies where —
(a) it appears to the Secretary of State or an authority that there are grounds for instituting proceedings against a person for an offence (under this Act or any other enactment) relating to an act or omission on the part of that person in relation to any benefit, and
(b) if an overpayment attributable to the act or omission had been made, the overpayment would have been recoverable from the person by, or due from the person to, the Secretary of State or an authority under or by virtue of section 71, 71ZB, 71A, 75 or 76 above.
(3) In subsection (2)(a) for “such proceedings” there is substituted “proceedings referred to in subsection (1) or (1A) above“.
(4) In subsection (4)—
(a) in paragraph (a), after “is” there is inserted “ or would have been ”;
(b) in paragraph (b), at the end there is inserted “or to the act or omission referred to in subsection (1A)(a).“
(5) In subsections (6) and (7), at the beginning there is inserted “In a case referred to in subsection (1)”.
(6) In subsection (7B)(a), after “is”, in both places, there is inserted “ or would have been ”.
(7) In subsection (8) after “subsection (1)(a)” there is inserted “ or (1A)(b) ”.
(8) In the Social Security Fraud Act 2001—
(a) in section 6B(1)(b), the words “by reference to any overpayment” are repealed and for “the offence mentioned in subsection (1)(b) of the appropriate penalty provision” there is substituted “ the offence to which the notice relates ”;
(b) in sections 6C(2)(b) and (3), 8(7)(b) and (8) and 9(7)(b) and (8), for “the overpayment” there is substituted “ any overpayment made ”.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.