Single person frauds aren't very difficult if you're careful. And, as these two examples show, they can bring in a lot of money.
Benefit cheat Samantha Evans dishonestly claimed more than £40,000.
Twenty-five-year-old Evans, from Tunstall, admitted two charges of dishonestly failing to give prompt notification of a change in her circumstances.
Stoke-on-Trent Crown Court heard she had not told the authorities that she was living with her partner between 2005 and 2008.
She claimed £24,155 of income support she was not entitled to and £16,240 in council tax and housing benefit.
Evans will be sentenced for the two offences, totalling £40,396 on September 10.
Her bail was extended but Judge Robert Trevor-Jones told her not to take that as an indication of the sentence.
"These are serious offences. All options remain open," he said.
In Essex, Richard Sullivan, 58, and his wife Julia, 38, have been jailed for 15 months each for falsely claiming council tax and housing benefit worth a total of £115,194. They received the benefits between June 1998 and October 2008 because Mrs Sullivan signed forms claiming to be a single parent with three children. More
27 Aug 2010
Two typical frauds
Here we have two typical benefit frauds, one a single person fraud and the second an employment fraud.
First, mother of two Julie Hills from Gravesend, who claimed over £17,000 in income support, housing and council tax benefit as a single parent, but failed to tell Gravesham council or the DWP when her boyfriend moved back into her home.
The couple had discussed her benefits but decided she should carry on claiming to help pay off some of their outstanding bills.
Hills, 38, was told she could have been sent to prison had she not pleaded guilty and begun to make repayments on the cash she had falsely claimed between August 2007 and September 2009.
Instead she was ordered to carry out 120 hours of community service.
Secondly, Peter Wynne, from Banbury, has been given a 12-week prison sentence, suspended for a year, and a 12-week curfew, between 8pm and 8am, after he admitted claiming more than £16,000 in benefits while working for an air conditioning company.
He had been overpaid housing benefit of £6,454, council tax benefit of £1,462 and DWP benefits of £9,059, which he will have to repay in full.
Wynne admitted failing to disclose that he was employed as a general assistant on a casual basis at the air conditioning company since 2003.
First, mother of two Julie Hills from Gravesend, who claimed over £17,000 in income support, housing and council tax benefit as a single parent, but failed to tell Gravesham council or the DWP when her boyfriend moved back into her home.
The couple had discussed her benefits but decided she should carry on claiming to help pay off some of their outstanding bills.
Hills, 38, was told she could have been sent to prison had she not pleaded guilty and begun to make repayments on the cash she had falsely claimed between August 2007 and September 2009.
Instead she was ordered to carry out 120 hours of community service.
Secondly, Peter Wynne, from Banbury, has been given a 12-week prison sentence, suspended for a year, and a 12-week curfew, between 8pm and 8am, after he admitted claiming more than £16,000 in benefits while working for an air conditioning company.
He had been overpaid housing benefit of £6,454, council tax benefit of £1,462 and DWP benefits of £9,059, which he will have to repay in full.
Wynne admitted failing to disclose that he was employed as a general assistant on a casual basis at the air conditioning company since 2003.
26 Aug 2010
A complaint about the benefit fraud website
A reader has complained about the benefit fraud website. You can read his complaints and judge for yourselves.
He replied (my comments to him inserted in italics):
Following this latest communication I am opening his complaints (which were not marked confidential) to a wider audience, so that he can get his objections seen in public and readers can form their own views.
P.S. A commenter has found his blog (which I failed to do, so well done and thank you, you know who you are but I don't!).
Could you please tell me where you get your statistics for the reported benefit fraud you scandalously misrepresented on the website you run http://www.benefitfraud.org.uk/index.html?To which I answered: "Which number, for instance?"
The information is so incorrect as to be classed as fraudulent.
I'd appreciate a response I can place on a website I run that exposes corruption by charities and organisations that misrepresent disabled people and their carers.
Mr Clive Arnold [a commenter has found his site and blog, see the postscript]
found: Searching for false disability benefit figures made by ignorant/stupid/misinformed people
He replied (my comments to him inserted in italics):
All of your statistics please, independent links/reports rather than Tory biased slewed ones. A good starting point would be that many people that claim DLA have Incapacity Benefit as part of that payment, attempting to state that the 2 benefits are claimed by two separate groups is wrong (not slightly misunderstood but wrong, check JSA fraud and error for instance)And this was the answer
All the numbers? They're sourced with links, I think.
What do you mean by "attempting to state"?
Also I'd like to know the services your organisation (Miles and Page Ltd) provides/supplies please, also what political affiliations it has (if any) and why the site is bordering on breaching the Disability Discriminations Act (almost a hate site)
None. What is your web site?
This web site gets hundreds of viewings each week and no one has ever come up with your claims. I deny it is a hate site. It covers benefit fraud. So does the blog.
You claim to report benefit fraud but you concentrate on disability benefits, by your own figures THE LEAST DEFRAUDED! Your figures are also out of date, your figures on Carers Allowance is based on when it was classed as Invalidity Carers Allowance, or is your research so biased as you are using false stats to persecute disabled people?
I am always happy to be told sourced, updated figures and look forward to your input.
I flatly deny concentrating on disability benefits or persecuting disabled people. Substantiate or withdraw.
In short, your figures are out of date, your sums don't add up and you seem to be targeting your biased angry (sic) at disabled people rather than at the benefits that have higher rates (supposedly) of fraud. So what's your problem?
Hm, where does the web site get angry? Do you see much anger on the blog (to which you have not referred)?
I'll post your comments on the blog if you like, but I would need to see your web site first.
thank you for your reply, ....And I answered "I note you have answered none of my questions, not even about the address of your own site?"
We (sic) shall be taking the matter up with your hosting company as your blind hatred of people in receipt of DLA and other disability related benefits show you are unable to see exactly how inappropriate your website content is and how far removed from reality you appear to be.
Mr Clive Arnold
Following this latest communication I am opening his complaints (which were not marked confidential) to a wider audience, so that he can get his objections seen in public and readers can form their own views.
P.S. A commenter has found his blog (which I failed to do, so well done and thank you, you know who you are but I don't!).
Tax credit fraud - fake foster children
Benefits cheats are being warned they will be hunted down after a woman claimed £28,000 for caring for foster children who did not exist.
Lisa Jensen, of Feering, will be electronically tagged after she admitted the fraud at Ipswich Crown Court.
An investigation by HM Revenue & Customs exposed the phoney claims, made over a period of several years.
Jensen sent her first claim for tax credits and child care to HMRC in November 2005.
She then called the helpline numerous times over the following months to increase her claims, adding extra children and childcare costs each time.
To explain all the changes she said she was a registered foster carer.
But when investigators examined the paperwork, they found the fostering companies she had named either did not exist or were unconnected with childcare.
Jensen was handed an eight month prison sentence, suspended for 18 months, and was ordered to pay costs of £500 within four months.
She will be tagged for three months and made subject to a curfew between 8pm and 6am.
Revenue and Customs will investigate further to find out how much of the £28,815 claimed by Jensen was banked, before bosses smelt a rat, to see if confiscation proceedings will be worthwhile.
Amazingly they have no idea how much money this thief has?
Talk about being dumbly process driven.
Lisa Jensen, of Feering, will be electronically tagged after she admitted the fraud at Ipswich Crown Court.
An investigation by HM Revenue & Customs exposed the phoney claims, made over a period of several years.
Jensen sent her first claim for tax credits and child care to HMRC in November 2005.
She then called the helpline numerous times over the following months to increase her claims, adding extra children and childcare costs each time.
To explain all the changes she said she was a registered foster carer.
But when investigators examined the paperwork, they found the fostering companies she had named either did not exist or were unconnected with childcare.
Jensen was handed an eight month prison sentence, suspended for 18 months, and was ordered to pay costs of £500 within four months.
She will be tagged for three months and made subject to a curfew between 8pm and 6am.
Revenue and Customs will investigate further to find out how much of the £28,815 claimed by Jensen was banked, before bosses smelt a rat, to see if confiscation proceedings will be worthwhile.
Amazingly they have no idea how much money this thief has?
Talk about being dumbly process driven.
25 Aug 2010
Benefits thief had £60k savings
A benefits cheat failed to declare more than £60,000 of savings as he continued to claim income support, a court heard.
Umesh Mohindra, of Saffron Road, South Wigston, ended up pocketing £30,827 he was not entitled to over five years.
The 53-year-old was given an 18-week jail sentence, suspended for two years, with 12 months of supervision.
He was also placed on a four-month night-time curfew, which means he must stay indoors between the hours of 9pm and 6am.
Registered disabled, he was said to be unfit to do unpaid work due to ill health, including epilepsy.
Sarah Jane Solomon, prosecuting, told Leicester Crown Court that Mohindra originally legitimately claimed income support in 1997, but by 2002 he had £20,000 in three different accounts.
His investments grew to £62,000 by the time he was charged.
The defendant admitted dishonestly failing to notify the DWP of a change in his circumstances.
The court was told that Mohindra, who has two university degrees, was making arrangements to repay the amount.
When questioned, he told investigators he had not fully understood how the benefits system worked.
Recorder James Burbidge QC said: "You've committed a significant benefit fraud over a long period of time when you were amassing substantial assets you knew you were obliged to disclose.
"It's pitiful to see a man of your education and intellect saying you didn't understand the benefits system."
The court was told that if he does not voluntarily pay the money back within two weeks, then there will be a proceeds of crime hearing to formally seize the cash.
Paul Prior, in mitigation, said: "He's disabled and claims benefits as a right, and that's not means tested." Why not?
Umesh Mohindra, of Saffron Road, South Wigston, ended up pocketing £30,827 he was not entitled to over five years.
The 53-year-old was given an 18-week jail sentence, suspended for two years, with 12 months of supervision.
He was also placed on a four-month night-time curfew, which means he must stay indoors between the hours of 9pm and 6am.
Registered disabled, he was said to be unfit to do unpaid work due to ill health, including epilepsy.
Sarah Jane Solomon, prosecuting, told Leicester Crown Court that Mohindra originally legitimately claimed income support in 1997, but by 2002 he had £20,000 in three different accounts.
His investments grew to £62,000 by the time he was charged.
The defendant admitted dishonestly failing to notify the DWP of a change in his circumstances.
The court was told that Mohindra, who has two university degrees, was making arrangements to repay the amount.
When questioned, he told investigators he had not fully understood how the benefits system worked.
Recorder James Burbidge QC said: "You've committed a significant benefit fraud over a long period of time when you were amassing substantial assets you knew you were obliged to disclose.
"It's pitiful to see a man of your education and intellect saying you didn't understand the benefits system."
The court was told that if he does not voluntarily pay the money back within two weeks, then there will be a proceeds of crime hearing to formally seize the cash.
Paul Prior, in mitigation, said: "He's disabled and claims benefits as a right, and that's not means tested." Why not?
24 Aug 2010
Community order needed - fine is too easy for him
A property developer with a £500,000 nest-egg has been convicted of falsely claiming benefits.
Geoffrey Berg, of Carnatic Road, in Mossley Hill, appeared at Liverpool Magistrates’ Court where he admitted falsely receiving the government hand-outs, totalling £10,799, between February, 2003, and March, 2010.
District Judge Ian Lomax ordered Berg to pay back the whole amount, and said at least £5,000 was to be paid within a month.
He was also fined £5,000 and ordered to pay the council’s costs of £1,228.
Berg owned two flats on the street where he lives – he resided in one and the other, which he has since sold, he rented out for £1,000 a month.
An investigation by Liverpool City Council’s benefit fraud team found that Berg bought the apartment he lived in with cash.
He then sold his previous home, making a profit of £70,000.
Following this, he was able to make a second cash purchase of another flat for £205,000.
When he was investigated, Berg was found to have around £200,000 in capital. Along with his own flat, his total worth was around £500,000.
Anyone with savings of more than £16,000 is not eligible for council tax benefit.
Geoffrey Berg, of Carnatic Road, in Mossley Hill, appeared at Liverpool Magistrates’ Court where he admitted falsely receiving the government hand-outs, totalling £10,799, between February, 2003, and March, 2010.
District Judge Ian Lomax ordered Berg to pay back the whole amount, and said at least £5,000 was to be paid within a month.
He was also fined £5,000 and ordered to pay the council’s costs of £1,228.
Berg owned two flats on the street where he lives – he resided in one and the other, which he has since sold, he rented out for £1,000 a month.
An investigation by Liverpool City Council’s benefit fraud team found that Berg bought the apartment he lived in with cash.
He then sold his previous home, making a profit of £70,000.
Following this, he was able to make a second cash purchase of another flat for £205,000.
When he was investigated, Berg was found to have around £200,000 in capital. Along with his own flat, his total worth was around £500,000.
Anyone with savings of more than £16,000 is not eligible for council tax benefit.
- Everyone convicted of benefit fraud who doesn't go to prison should have to do unpaid work.
Benefit thieves should also have to repay twice what they've stolen, and should not be eligible for any further benefits – including tax credits - until they have. A confiscation order should be automatic and immediate.
If you don't punish people who are convicted of an easy crime, the offence will continue to look attractive.
23 Aug 2010
Fraud 'low-hanging fruit' for Experian
By having access to the Government's database of incapacity and housing benefits claimants, the CEO of Experian believes it should be possible to shave at least £1bn from Britain's £87bn welfare budget.
I think that fraud is currently the low-hanging fruit. We see that in a number of categories. We see it in social housing; we see benefits fraud; we see pension frauds.More
20 Aug 2010
Brighton benefits thief properly fined
A Brighton benefit fraudster’s sunshine holiday came to an abrupt end when he was arrested at Leeds Airport.
Police were waiting to arrest Patrick Walker, 38, formerly of Newick Road, Moulseoomb, as he returned from a holiday in Gran Canaria on Monday 16 August .
According to Brighton and Hove City Council, after a night spent in police cells, Walker, who now lives in Shipley, West Yorkshire, was brought to Brighton Magistrates´ Court on yesterday to face charges of fraudulently claiming housing benefit.
He admitted all three charges and was fined a total of £801, ordered to pay £750 court costs and a £15 victim surcharge. The court heard that Walker had already repaid the £952.57 benefits he had fraudulently claimed.
Mr Len Batten, prosecuting on behalf of Brighton and Hove City Council, said that in March 2008 Walker had claimed housing benefit as a joint tenant of a property in Cheltenham Place.
He produced a tenancy agreement and a letter from Mountview Estates which he claimed was his landlord.
As a result he received a weekly housing benefit entitlement of £79.85 and council tax benefit of £10.41.
However, in April, it was discovered that Walker had never lived at Cheltenham Place, but was a friend of one of the previous tenants who had passed away.
Mountview Estates also confirmed that Walker had never been a tenant.
As a result, Walker had incurred a housing benefit overpayment of £947.80 and a council tax benefit of £104.77.
He had also produced false documents to support his benefit claims and failed to attend three meetings set up to discuss the matters.
A warrant for Walker’s arrest, without bail, was issued after he failed to appear at court on September 8 last year.
He was eventually tracked down to an address in Yorkshire.
Councillor Trevor Alford, cabinet member responsible for revenue and benefits, said: “This sends a strong message that you cannot get away with defrauding the taxpayer by moving to another part of the country – the council will eventually track you down.
“In this case, a £900 overpayment has resulted in fines of over £1,500.
“Benefit fraud means honest council taxpayers end up subsidising cheats.
“Benefits are for those who genuinely need them – not for fraudsters.”
But look at the amount of work involved in bringing just one man to justice.
Police were waiting to arrest Patrick Walker, 38, formerly of Newick Road, Moulseoomb, as he returned from a holiday in Gran Canaria on Monday 16 August .
According to Brighton and Hove City Council, after a night spent in police cells, Walker, who now lives in Shipley, West Yorkshire, was brought to Brighton Magistrates´ Court on yesterday to face charges of fraudulently claiming housing benefit.
He admitted all three charges and was fined a total of £801, ordered to pay £750 court costs and a £15 victim surcharge. The court heard that Walker had already repaid the £952.57 benefits he had fraudulently claimed.
Mr Len Batten, prosecuting on behalf of Brighton and Hove City Council, said that in March 2008 Walker had claimed housing benefit as a joint tenant of a property in Cheltenham Place.
He produced a tenancy agreement and a letter from Mountview Estates which he claimed was his landlord.
As a result he received a weekly housing benefit entitlement of £79.85 and council tax benefit of £10.41.
However, in April, it was discovered that Walker had never lived at Cheltenham Place, but was a friend of one of the previous tenants who had passed away.
Mountview Estates also confirmed that Walker had never been a tenant.
As a result, Walker had incurred a housing benefit overpayment of £947.80 and a council tax benefit of £104.77.
He had also produced false documents to support his benefit claims and failed to attend three meetings set up to discuss the matters.
A warrant for Walker’s arrest, without bail, was issued after he failed to appear at court on September 8 last year.
He was eventually tracked down to an address in Yorkshire.
Councillor Trevor Alford, cabinet member responsible for revenue and benefits, said: “This sends a strong message that you cannot get away with defrauding the taxpayer by moving to another part of the country – the council will eventually track you down.
“In this case, a £900 overpayment has resulted in fines of over £1,500.
“Benefit fraud means honest council taxpayers end up subsidising cheats.
“Benefits are for those who genuinely need them – not for fraudsters.”
But look at the amount of work involved in bringing just one man to justice.
19 Aug 2010
Council tax discounts clawed back in E Hampshire
More than £28,000 of wrongly-claimed Council Tax discounts have been clawed back by East Hampshire District Council since a new system was launched a few weeks ago.
More than 50 residents have been found falsely claiming a 25% discount for being the only adult living in the property and more discoveries are on the cards.
EHDC and the Government's Audit Commission have teamed up to stop the bogus claims.
Ineligible claimants have been caught out by a comparison of the council's Tax and Register of Electors lists through the National Fraud Initiative.
It is against the rules to continue to claim the 25% discount if another adult moves in although there are instances where adults are not counted and discounts can still apply, such as with full-time students, adults with mental impairments and live-in carers.
Brian Wood, EHDC Revenues Manager, said: "I would urge anyone who is claiming a discount to which they are not entitled to contact the council now. We can agree an arrangement to pay back any arrears. We will be writing to over 800 households which have been highlighted by our investigations. If we do not receive a reply to our letter, we are likely to take the discount away, which will result in arrears of hundreds of pounds."
No word of any penalties.
More than 50 residents have been found falsely claiming a 25% discount for being the only adult living in the property and more discoveries are on the cards.
EHDC and the Government's Audit Commission have teamed up to stop the bogus claims.
Ineligible claimants have been caught out by a comparison of the council's Tax and Register of Electors lists through the National Fraud Initiative.
It is against the rules to continue to claim the 25% discount if another adult moves in although there are instances where adults are not counted and discounts can still apply, such as with full-time students, adults with mental impairments and live-in carers.
Brian Wood, EHDC Revenues Manager, said: "I would urge anyone who is claiming a discount to which they are not entitled to contact the council now. We can agree an arrangement to pay back any arrears. We will be writing to over 800 households which have been highlighted by our investigations. If we do not receive a reply to our letter, we are likely to take the discount away, which will result in arrears of hundreds of pounds."
No word of any penalties.
Claims and detection rates in Plymouth
In Plymouth, about 500 benefits cheats have been caught by investigators working for the DWP and the city council since April 2009.
“In 2009-10, our fraud investigators in Plymouth caught 240 benefit cheats, and from April to the end of July this year, they have caught 100,” said a DWP spokesman yesterday.
“Tackling this scandalous abuse of taxpayers’ money is an essential part of the Government’s plans to reform the welfare state so that it is less complex and no longer open to such activity.”
Council fraud investigators have also been busy. In the 12 months since August last year, they have uncovered 139 cases of proven fraud, resulting in 81 formal cautions, 13 administrative penalties, 34 successful prosecutions and 11 cases of fraud proven where no sanction has been imposed.
There have also been 45 cases closed as “incorrect benefit”.
About £400,000 of housing and council tax benefits was overpaid in that period — though not all cases of overpayment are fraudulent.
The council deals with about 29,000 claims for housing and/or council tax benefit.
The DWP administers benefits for 27,290 claimants in Plymouth.
The city council has four full-time and two part-time benefit fraud investigators, and a sanctions officer who checks cases.
A council spokesman said: “The system allows council officers to consider a variety of ‘data matches’ to check that we have the most relevant and up-to-date information.
“For example, we can see whether a claimant is receiving credit interest on a bank account or is in receipt of tax credits.
“The idea being discussed on a national level is that in addition to these data matches, officers would also be able to consult credit referencing agency data from companies such as Experian to flag up anomalies requiring further investigation.”
The council already uses this idea, though it pays for access to the information on a case-by-case basis if it is deemed necessary.
Click here for some Plymouth cases.
“In 2009-10, our fraud investigators in Plymouth caught 240 benefit cheats, and from April to the end of July this year, they have caught 100,” said a DWP spokesman yesterday.
“Tackling this scandalous abuse of taxpayers’ money is an essential part of the Government’s plans to reform the welfare state so that it is less complex and no longer open to such activity.”
Council fraud investigators have also been busy. In the 12 months since August last year, they have uncovered 139 cases of proven fraud, resulting in 81 formal cautions, 13 administrative penalties, 34 successful prosecutions and 11 cases of fraud proven where no sanction has been imposed.
There have also been 45 cases closed as “incorrect benefit”.
About £400,000 of housing and council tax benefits was overpaid in that period — though not all cases of overpayment are fraudulent.
The council deals with about 29,000 claims for housing and/or council tax benefit.
The overpayments amounted to 0.51 per cent of the total benefit paid for 2009-2010.
The DWP administers benefits for 27,290 claimants in Plymouth.
According to the latest figures available, there were 5,870 job-seekers; 13,970 claiming employment and support allowance and incapacity benefits; 2,930 on lone parent benefits; 2,160 carers; and 2,360 disabled people.
The city council has four full-time and two part-time benefit fraud investigators, and a sanctions officer who checks cases.
A council spokesman said: “The system allows council officers to consider a variety of ‘data matches’ to check that we have the most relevant and up-to-date information.
“For example, we can see whether a claimant is receiving credit interest on a bank account or is in receipt of tax credits.
“The idea being discussed on a national level is that in addition to these data matches, officers would also be able to consult credit referencing agency data from companies such as Experian to flag up anomalies requiring further investigation.”
The council already uses this idea, though it pays for access to the information on a case-by-case basis if it is deemed necessary.
Click here for some Plymouth cases.
18 Aug 2010
Slap on the wrist for benefits thief
A Winyates man has been fined by Redditch Magistrates Court for benefit fraud.
Mark Keelan, aged 63, of Abbotswood Close, pleaded guilty to offences of fraudulently claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance and Council Tax Benefit totalling £2,504 between August 2009 and January 2010 by failing to declare that he was working as a traffic administrator.
The investigation was started by the Department for Work and Pensions who identified the undeclared work through a data match. After the court heard on August 11 that Mr Keelan had fully co-operated with the investigation and was sorry for the offences, he was fined £100 and ordered to pay £100 towards the prosecution costs plus a £15 victim surcharge.
A spokesperson for Redditch Borough Council said: “Going back to work doesn’t always mean giving up all benefits. Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit can often provide extra support to help you while you work but correct circumstances must always be declared.”
DWP Minister for Welfare Reform, Lord Freud, said: "Benefit thieves are costing the taxpayer almost £1billion per year. This money is intended to help those most in need. We will continue to tackle this problem at the frontline but also at the root, by reforming the benefits system to make it less open to abuse."
Sticking to that old £1bn figure, Lord Freud?
Mark Keelan, aged 63, of Abbotswood Close, pleaded guilty to offences of fraudulently claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance and Council Tax Benefit totalling £2,504 between August 2009 and January 2010 by failing to declare that he was working as a traffic administrator.
The investigation was started by the Department for Work and Pensions who identified the undeclared work through a data match. After the court heard on August 11 that Mr Keelan had fully co-operated with the investigation and was sorry for the offences, he was fined £100 and ordered to pay £100 towards the prosecution costs plus a £15 victim surcharge.
A spokesperson for Redditch Borough Council said: “Going back to work doesn’t always mean giving up all benefits. Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit can often provide extra support to help you while you work but correct circumstances must always be declared.”
DWP Minister for Welfare Reform, Lord Freud, said: "Benefit thieves are costing the taxpayer almost £1billion per year. This money is intended to help those most in need. We will continue to tackle this problem at the frontline but also at the root, by reforming the benefits system to make it less open to abuse."
Sticking to that old £1bn figure, Lord Freud?
Telford benefits cheat caught on facebook
A Telford woman claiming benefits as a single parent living alone posted items on Facebook showing her with her husband and their three children.
Kim Stokes, 36, and her partner also made a joint application for a loan.
Telford magistrates court heard yesterday Stokes had been overpaid by about £15,000 in housing and council tax benefits and income support over two years.
Deputy District Judge David Stott gave Stokes, of Hayward Avenue, Donnington, a 12-month community order. She must complete 200 hours of unpaid work and be under supervision and pay £100 costs.
She admitted two charges of failing to notify changes in her circumstances to the DWP between May, 2007 and October, 2009.
Miss Catherine Thomas, prosecuting, said Stokes had told the DWP she was a lone parent, unemployed and separated from her husband, Richard Stokes.
However, they were living together and had jointly applied for a loan. Investigators also found Facebook items showing Stokes, her husband and children involved in family activities.
Mr Sheikel Ahmed, defending, said the couple had been apart, but he later started regularly stopping and she should have told the DWP.
Kim Stokes, 36, and her partner also made a joint application for a loan.
Telford magistrates court heard yesterday Stokes had been overpaid by about £15,000 in housing and council tax benefits and income support over two years.
Deputy District Judge David Stott gave Stokes, of Hayward Avenue, Donnington, a 12-month community order. She must complete 200 hours of unpaid work and be under supervision and pay £100 costs.
She admitted two charges of failing to notify changes in her circumstances to the DWP between May, 2007 and October, 2009.
Miss Catherine Thomas, prosecuting, said Stokes had told the DWP she was a lone parent, unemployed and separated from her husband, Richard Stokes.
However, they were living together and had jointly applied for a loan. Investigators also found Facebook items showing Stokes, her husband and children involved in family activities.
Mr Sheikel Ahmed, defending, said the couple had been apart, but he later started regularly stopping and she should have told the DWP.
17 Aug 2010
Let's not send them to prison
A woman who cheated the benefits system out of thousands of pounds was told to sit at the back of court for an afternoon as punishment.
Tara Howard worked in two chip shops and a bakery while claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance, as well as housing and council tax benefits.
The mum-of-one pleaded guilty to two counts of making a false statement to get benefits at Worcester Magis-trates Court last month – which put her in breach of an eight-week suspended sentence imposed last time she was caught cheating the system. Ruth Edwards, prosecuting for the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP), said Howard, aged 31, had falsely claimed a total of £3,684.66 – £3,419.78 in Job-seeker’s Allowance and £264.88 in housing and council tax benefits.
Howard had been working for the Lyppard Fryer, Warndon Villages, for about seven hours a week – earning a weekly income of £91.
Mrs Edwards said Howard, of St Swithins Street, had also worked for Angel Plaice and Three Cooks Bakery, both in Worcester. When interviewed in November 2009, Howard admitted falsely claiming benefits and said she had “forgotten” to tell the relevant authorities of her change in circumstances.
Paul Stanley, defending, said that his client was in the process of turning her life around after suffering a bad period, which had sent her into a spiral of depression – the reason Howard was handed a suspended sentence the first time she was prosecuted for benefit fraud in December 2007.
He said: “She is now living in independent accommodation. She hopes to get some work in the care industry and get her NVQ. This is a woman who has perhaps turned her life around in more recent times.”
He felt she would do well with a community order, having completed the last one successfully.
But Mr Stanley acknowledged her last crimes put her in breach of the suspended sentence, and the court had no choice but to give her a custodial sentence.
As well as a £100 fine, a 12-month community order and 120 hours unpaid work, Howard was ordered to spend the rest of the day sitting on the public bench at the back of court in ‘custody’.
Howard – who now owes the DWP more than £5,000, which will be taken out of her weekly benefits – was warned she would face a much harsher sentence should she go to the bathroom without getting permission from the magistrates as it would be classed as ‘escaping custody’.
Meanwhile, read of the Hove charity worker who held Tupperware-style parties where she flogged fake Rolexes and UGG boots and was cheating the taxpayer out of tens of thousands of pounds at the same time.
Diana Guistiniana fraudulently claimed more than £65,000 in benefits while using her home to sell fake designer goods.
Now the mother-of-three was ordered to do more community service after she admitted four fraud offences at Hove Crown Court.
It was the second time Guistiniana, of Larkfield Way, Brighton, had appeared before the court for sentencing.
Last year the 46-year-old was ordered to do 150 hours unpaid work after she admitted selling counterfeit goods during parties at her home.
Recorder Christopher Morris-Coole gave Guistiniana a nine-month jail sentence suspended for a year and ordered her to take part in a 20-day Inspire project which provides counselling and group work.
Does the judiciary consider benefit theft a real crime?
The government has no hope of cutting benefit fraud if the sentences for the few who do get caught are trivial.
Tara Howard worked in two chip shops and a bakery while claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance, as well as housing and council tax benefits.
The mum-of-one pleaded guilty to two counts of making a false statement to get benefits at Worcester Magis-trates Court last month – which put her in breach of an eight-week suspended sentence imposed last time she was caught cheating the system. Ruth Edwards, prosecuting for the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP), said Howard, aged 31, had falsely claimed a total of £3,684.66 – £3,419.78 in Job-seeker’s Allowance and £264.88 in housing and council tax benefits.
Howard had been working for the Lyppard Fryer, Warndon Villages, for about seven hours a week – earning a weekly income of £91.
Mrs Edwards said Howard, of St Swithins Street, had also worked for Angel Plaice and Three Cooks Bakery, both in Worcester. When interviewed in November 2009, Howard admitted falsely claiming benefits and said she had “forgotten” to tell the relevant authorities of her change in circumstances.
Paul Stanley, defending, said that his client was in the process of turning her life around after suffering a bad period, which had sent her into a spiral of depression – the reason Howard was handed a suspended sentence the first time she was prosecuted for benefit fraud in December 2007.
He said: “She is now living in independent accommodation. She hopes to get some work in the care industry and get her NVQ. This is a woman who has perhaps turned her life around in more recent times.”
He felt she would do well with a community order, having completed the last one successfully.
But Mr Stanley acknowledged her last crimes put her in breach of the suspended sentence, and the court had no choice but to give her a custodial sentence.
As well as a £100 fine, a 12-month community order and 120 hours unpaid work, Howard was ordered to spend the rest of the day sitting on the public bench at the back of court in ‘custody’.
Howard – who now owes the DWP more than £5,000, which will be taken out of her weekly benefits – was warned she would face a much harsher sentence should she go to the bathroom without getting permission from the magistrates as it would be classed as ‘escaping custody’.
========
Meanwhile, read of the Hove charity worker who held Tupperware-style parties where she flogged fake Rolexes and UGG boots and was cheating the taxpayer out of tens of thousands of pounds at the same time.
Diana Guistiniana fraudulently claimed more than £65,000 in benefits while using her home to sell fake designer goods.
Now the mother-of-three was ordered to do more community service after she admitted four fraud offences at Hove Crown Court.
It was the second time Guistiniana, of Larkfield Way, Brighton, had appeared before the court for sentencing.
Last year the 46-year-old was ordered to do 150 hours unpaid work after she admitted selling counterfeit goods during parties at her home.
Recorder Christopher Morris-Coole gave Guistiniana a nine-month jail sentence suspended for a year and ordered her to take part in a 20-day Inspire project which provides counselling and group work.
Does the judiciary consider benefit theft a real crime?
The government has no hope of cutting benefit fraud if the sentences for the few who do get caught are trivial.
16 Aug 2010
Light sentence for £60k benefit fraud
A “very, very dishonest lady” who fraudulently claimed more than £60,000 in benefits was spared prison because it would cost taxpayers too much, a judge has ruled.
Regina Hutchinson swindled Oxford City Council and the Department for Work and Pensions out of £60,365 over more than 10 years.
The 47-year-old mother of three, from Abingdon Road, Oxford, illegally claimed £26,000 in income support and about £34,000 in housing and council tax benefits.
At Oxford Crown Court yesterday, Judge Christopher Compston said the £40,000 cost of a year’s imprisonment meant the public would be better served if Hutchinson, who works for supermarket chain Sainsbury’s, paid back the money at a rate of £450 a month.
Wendy Hewitt, prosecuting, said: “She had been in receipt of benefits, legitimately, since about 1993.
“In about 1998 she moved to a new address and quite simply failed to disclose she was married and had a child.
“She claimed she was a lone parent, but the reality throughout that time was she was a married lady, her husband was living with her and her husband was working.”
Miss Hewitt said the offences came to light early last year and Hutchinson admitted her wrongdoing when interviewed by council investigators.
She has already repaid £2,000 to the city council and £2,000 to the Department for Work and Pensions, the court heard.
Hugh Williams, defending, said: “On one hand, this is a person involved in a lengthy benefit fraud, but on the other she’s someone who has stuck by her family through thick and very difficult thin.”
He said Hutchinson’s eldest son had been “expelled from about three schools” between the age of four and 16 and had “smashed up” the council house the family lived in.
Mr Williams said his client used the benefit money to pay for the repairs to the house, so she would not have to tell the council.
Hutchinson had earlier admitted two charges of dishonestly claiming exemption from liability, obtaining money transfer by deception, obtaining property by deception and two charges of failing to notify a change in circumstances.
The judge sentenced her to 15 months’ imprisonment, suspended for two years, gave her a six-month supervision order and ordered that her repayments should continue at £450 a month.
Describing her as “a very, very dishonest lady”, he said: “This is a very large sum of money and all of us know there’s far too much of this around and you richly deserve to go to prison at once.
“However, there are some very strong points in your favour.”
He said it cost about £40,000 a year to keep someone in jail and that Hutchinson would have paid off her debt in 10 years, but warned: “I don’t want the public to get any message you can always do this.
“Do this by a whisker again and you will be sent to prison.”
Regina Hutchinson swindled Oxford City Council and the Department for Work and Pensions out of £60,365 over more than 10 years.
The 47-year-old mother of three, from Abingdon Road, Oxford, illegally claimed £26,000 in income support and about £34,000 in housing and council tax benefits.
At Oxford Crown Court yesterday, Judge Christopher Compston said the £40,000 cost of a year’s imprisonment meant the public would be better served if Hutchinson, who works for supermarket chain Sainsbury’s, paid back the money at a rate of £450 a month.
Wendy Hewitt, prosecuting, said: “She had been in receipt of benefits, legitimately, since about 1993.
“In about 1998 she moved to a new address and quite simply failed to disclose she was married and had a child.
“She claimed she was a lone parent, but the reality throughout that time was she was a married lady, her husband was living with her and her husband was working.”
Miss Hewitt said the offences came to light early last year and Hutchinson admitted her wrongdoing when interviewed by council investigators.
She has already repaid £2,000 to the city council and £2,000 to the Department for Work and Pensions, the court heard.
Hugh Williams, defending, said: “On one hand, this is a person involved in a lengthy benefit fraud, but on the other she’s someone who has stuck by her family through thick and very difficult thin.”
He said Hutchinson’s eldest son had been “expelled from about three schools” between the age of four and 16 and had “smashed up” the council house the family lived in.
Mr Williams said his client used the benefit money to pay for the repairs to the house, so she would not have to tell the council.
Hutchinson had earlier admitted two charges of dishonestly claiming exemption from liability, obtaining money transfer by deception, obtaining property by deception and two charges of failing to notify a change in circumstances.
The judge sentenced her to 15 months’ imprisonment, suspended for two years, gave her a six-month supervision order and ordered that her repayments should continue at £450 a month.
Describing her as “a very, very dishonest lady”, he said: “This is a very large sum of money and all of us know there’s far too much of this around and you richly deserve to go to prison at once.
“However, there are some very strong points in your favour.”
He said it cost about £40,000 a year to keep someone in jail and that Hutchinson would have paid off her debt in 10 years, but warned: “I don’t want the public to get any message you can always do this.
“Do this by a whisker again and you will be sent to prison.”
14 Aug 2010
Sickness in Merthyr Tydfil
As Jeff Randall writes, it's inconceivable that the nation's health is so poor that 2.6 million people need incapacity benefit.
In Merthyr Tydfil incapacity benefit is being claimed by more than one in 10 of the working population.
That can't be right.
In Merthyr Tydfil incapacity benefit is being claimed by more than one in 10 of the working population.
That can't be right.
13 Aug 2010
Double house for benefits family of eleven
There's no fraud alleged here, but this instance shows taxpayers writing a family an open cheque.
A family of benefit scroungers (pictured) who rake in £42,000 of taxpayers' money a year have been given a new seven-bedroom home - worth £300,000, reports The Sun.
Jobless Kevin and Sharron Bishop get £3,500 a month in handouts to keep them and their nine kids clothed and fed.
Neighbours watched as they moved from their old four-bedroom home at 23 Mayfield Road in Yeovil, Somerset, to numbers 29 and 31 on Friday.
Their belongings included flat screen TVs, sofas, armchairs, beanbags and DVDs.
Locals - who say the family even had new furniture delivered - were yesterday fuming at the parents, who haven't worked for 20 YEARS.
One, who didn't want to be named, said: "It is infuriating. We pay taxes to let them do nothing." Another said: "They spend their money on exotic parrots. They are fit to work but don't want to."
The Bishops' payout, which is around twice the average national household income, is made up of income support, tax credits, housing benefit and council tax benefit.
Yarlington Housing Group, which provided their new home, said the family qualified for a local scheme called Furnicare in which they can buy furniture and white goods at knock-down prices.
Yesterday, four old TVs were left dumped on the ground outside the new home waiting to be taken away.
Ex-cabbie Kevin, who is in his 40s and chain-smokes rolled-up cigarettes, refused to comment. He said at his door: "I don't want to hear any more about this or I'll phone the police for harassment."
Sharron, 41, was unavailable yesterday afternoon because she was "still in bed".
Neighbours claim their kids, aged two to 17, have been responsible for petty vandalism and noise. One called them "foul-mouthed brats".
The Land Registry values the new home at around £300,000. Yarlington Housing Group said the family were severely overcrowded in the old property.
It said of the new knocked-through home: "We had a duty to re-house them and this was deemed the most appropriate way.
"Should they relinquish it at any time it can be easily returned to two homes."
A family of benefit scroungers (pictured) who rake in £42,000 of taxpayers' money a year have been given a new seven-bedroom home - worth £300,000, reports The Sun.
Jobless Kevin and Sharron Bishop get £3,500 a month in handouts to keep them and their nine kids clothed and fed.
Neighbours watched as they moved from their old four-bedroom home at 23 Mayfield Road in Yeovil, Somerset, to numbers 29 and 31 on Friday.
Their belongings included flat screen TVs, sofas, armchairs, beanbags and DVDs.
Locals - who say the family even had new furniture delivered - were yesterday fuming at the parents, who haven't worked for 20 YEARS.
One, who didn't want to be named, said: "It is infuriating. We pay taxes to let them do nothing." Another said: "They spend their money on exotic parrots. They are fit to work but don't want to."
The Bishops' payout, which is around twice the average national household income, is made up of income support, tax credits, housing benefit and council tax benefit.
Yarlington Housing Group, which provided their new home, said the family qualified for a local scheme called Furnicare in which they can buy furniture and white goods at knock-down prices.
Yesterday, four old TVs were left dumped on the ground outside the new home waiting to be taken away.
Ex-cabbie Kevin, who is in his 40s and chain-smokes rolled-up cigarettes, refused to comment. He said at his door: "I don't want to hear any more about this or I'll phone the police for harassment."
Sharron, 41, was unavailable yesterday afternoon because she was "still in bed".
Neighbours claim their kids, aged two to 17, have been responsible for petty vandalism and noise. One called them "foul-mouthed brats".
The Land Registry values the new home at around £300,000. Yarlington Housing Group said the family were severely overcrowded in the old property.
It said of the new knocked-through home: "We had a duty to re-house them and this was deemed the most appropriate way.
"Should they relinquish it at any time it can be easily returned to two homes."
Benefits cheat jailed for four years after £40k fraud
A benefits cheat has been jailed for a total of four years for his part in a fraud involving more than £40,000.
Donald Watson, 47, was convicted of a number of benefit fraud charges and attempting to pervert the course of justice in a prosecution brought by South Gloucestershire Council.
Annabelle Ballinger, who also appeared at Bristol Crown Court, was found guilty of benefit fraud and will be sentenced at a later date.
Watson, formerly of Hardwicke Close, Warmley, had been a benefit claimant for a number of years. He said he rented his home from Ballinger, who was said to live elsewhere.
Watson claimed income support, housing and council tax benefit on the basis that he had no income, capital or assets of any kind. But an investigation was carried out after information was received that Watson had undeclared capital and was actually the partner of his alleged landlady.
Further inquiries established that Watson also had capital and/or a part interest in another property, which had not been declared.
As a result, Watson was overpaid £23,892 in housing benefit, £3,401 in council tax benefit and £13,518 in income support over the period 2004 to 2008.
A trial had started last year but was stopped after the defendant introduced false claim forms. When it re-started two months ago, both Watson and Ballinger faced an additional indictment relating to perverting the course of justice.
After an eight-week hearing, Watson was found guilty on all charges. He was sentenced to two years imprisonment for each of seven benefit fraud counts, to run concurrently. For attempting to pervert the course of justice, he was sentenced to two years imprisonment, to run consecutively.
Ballinger was found guilty of benefit fraud but cleared of attempting to pervert the course of justice.
Donald Watson, 47, was convicted of a number of benefit fraud charges and attempting to pervert the course of justice in a prosecution brought by South Gloucestershire Council.
Annabelle Ballinger, who also appeared at Bristol Crown Court, was found guilty of benefit fraud and will be sentenced at a later date.
Watson, formerly of Hardwicke Close, Warmley, had been a benefit claimant for a number of years. He said he rented his home from Ballinger, who was said to live elsewhere.
Watson claimed income support, housing and council tax benefit on the basis that he had no income, capital or assets of any kind. But an investigation was carried out after information was received that Watson had undeclared capital and was actually the partner of his alleged landlady.
Further inquiries established that Watson also had capital and/or a part interest in another property, which had not been declared.
As a result, Watson was overpaid £23,892 in housing benefit, £3,401 in council tax benefit and £13,518 in income support over the period 2004 to 2008.
A trial had started last year but was stopped after the defendant introduced false claim forms. When it re-started two months ago, both Watson and Ballinger faced an additional indictment relating to perverting the course of justice.
After an eight-week hearing, Watson was found guilty on all charges. He was sentenced to two years imprisonment for each of seven benefit fraud counts, to run concurrently. For attempting to pervert the course of justice, he was sentenced to two years imprisonment, to run consecutively.
Ballinger was found guilty of benefit fraud but cleared of attempting to pervert the course of justice.
Benefit cheat spared jail for £22,000 con
A benefits cheat who claimed nearly £22,000 she wasn't entitled to has walked free from court.
Janet Milewski, aged 55, of Stokewell Road, Wath-upon-Dearne, was given a six month curfew order and ordered to pay £500 costs after failing to declare her partner was living with her.
Rotherham Council's Fraud Investigation Unit stepped in after receiving a referral from the Audit Commission's National Fraud Initiative suggesting Milewski had a partner living with her at Stokewell Road.
Further checks revealed Milewski had failed to mention that she was living with her partner when filling out forms for housing benefit, council tax benefit and income support.
Milewski was interviewed and admitted her partner was living with her and had been doing so for a number of years.
She also told investigators she was aware that she should have informed the council's benefit section as well as the Department for Work and Pensions.
Rotherham Magistrates Court heard Milewski said she had not done so for financial reasons and she admitted lying.
Milewski was told she was lucky not to be going to prison and was given a six month curfew order which means she must stay inside between 7pm and 7am every day.
Janet Milewski, aged 55, of Stokewell Road, Wath-upon-Dearne, was given a six month curfew order and ordered to pay £500 costs after failing to declare her partner was living with her.
Rotherham Council's Fraud Investigation Unit stepped in after receiving a referral from the Audit Commission's National Fraud Initiative suggesting Milewski had a partner living with her at Stokewell Road.
Further checks revealed Milewski had failed to mention that she was living with her partner when filling out forms for housing benefit, council tax benefit and income support.
Milewski was interviewed and admitted her partner was living with her and had been doing so for a number of years.
She also told investigators she was aware that she should have informed the council's benefit section as well as the Department for Work and Pensions.
Rotherham Magistrates Court heard Milewski said she had not done so for financial reasons and she admitted lying.
Milewski was told she was lucky not to be going to prison and was given a six month curfew order which means she must stay inside between 7pm and 7am every day.
Standard of proof for benefit fraud
Here's an example showing why investigation of a benefit fraud can take so long and cost so much.
A benefit cheat who dishonestly claimed more than £30,000 has walked free from court after being given a suspended prison sentence.
Mother-of-four Tracey Lawrence failed to notify the authorities that she was living with her partner who was in work, Ipswich Crown Court heard.
Lawrence, 38, of Evergreen Road, Lowestoft, admitted two offences of failing to notify a change in her circumstances and was given a six-month jail sentence suspended for two years and ordered to do 200 hours unpaid work in the community.
Sentencing her Judge David Goodin said the offences crossed the custody threshold and if she breached the suspended sentence she would be facing a prison term.
Mark Stern, prosecuting, said Lawrence had been overpaid £32,715 in income support and housing and council tax benefit over a four-year period between 2004 and 2008 after she failed to disclose that her partner had moved in with her.
The court heard that surveillance was carried out on Lawrence’s home on 43 occasions and her partner was seen coming and going from the premises.
Nicola May, for Lawrence, said her client’s claims for benefit had initially been genuine but had become fraudulent.
She said Lawrence had four children and had not enjoyed a high standard of living.
“They are a family who have always struggled to cope,” she said.
A benefit cheat who dishonestly claimed more than £30,000 has walked free from court after being given a suspended prison sentence.
Mother-of-four Tracey Lawrence failed to notify the authorities that she was living with her partner who was in work, Ipswich Crown Court heard.
Lawrence, 38, of Evergreen Road, Lowestoft, admitted two offences of failing to notify a change in her circumstances and was given a six-month jail sentence suspended for two years and ordered to do 200 hours unpaid work in the community.
Sentencing her Judge David Goodin said the offences crossed the custody threshold and if she breached the suspended sentence she would be facing a prison term.
Mark Stern, prosecuting, said Lawrence had been overpaid £32,715 in income support and housing and council tax benefit over a four-year period between 2004 and 2008 after she failed to disclose that her partner had moved in with her.
The court heard that surveillance was carried out on Lawrence’s home on 43 occasions and her partner was seen coming and going from the premises.
Nicola May, for Lawrence, said her client’s claims for benefit had initially been genuine but had become fraudulent.
She said Lawrence had four children and had not enjoyed a high standard of living.
“They are a family who have always struggled to cope,” she said.
12 Aug 2010
Light sentences in Harlow
Jalil Mughal, 48, of Long Ley, pleaded guilty to failing to declare a rise in his tax credits. He was overpaid benefits between January 2008 and January 2010. He will have to pay back Housing Benefit of £4,457 and Council Tax Benefit of £1,077. He also received a six month Conditional Discharge.
Esther Oguns, 37, of Pittmans Field, was found guilty of working and claiming Housing and Council Tax Benefits between September 2008 and September 2009 to which she was not entitled as she had no right to work in this country.
Mrs Oguns will have to repay Housing Benefit of £6,729 and Council Tax benefit of £83.71. She received a fine of £33 and had to pay £65 in costs.
Esther Oguns, 37, of Pittmans Field, was found guilty of working and claiming Housing and Council Tax Benefits between September 2008 and September 2009 to which she was not entitled as she had no right to work in this country.
Mrs Oguns will have to repay Housing Benefit of £6,729 and Council Tax benefit of £83.71. She received a fine of £33 and had to pay £65 in costs.
A reader writes again
At least the new government is looking at the size of the problem. On a previous post here I said that I had written to the Chancellor and given my own estimate of Benefit Fraud as £6bn based on 12 years of experience and research. Another point I made is that until they stop writing off fraudulent overpayments, they will NEVER turn the abuse around.
Some say that the fraudsters do it for the money where some is pure greed and others for need and there is an element of society that say the latter is OK. I disagree. Whatever way you look at it is fraud, big or small and we need to set in motion a real deterrent. The threat of being caught, of being prosecuted and the like is not a deterrent to the vast majority of the fraudsters; it might be to those who never dream of committing Benefit Fraud. Sentences as a result of prosecution are laughable - the courts have no choice!
I would love to have a pound for every time I have said 'Proving an overpayment due to fraud wipes the smile off their face". It is 100% true; trust me - read the book "Benefit Thieves" by "Six Hundred".
So much of Benefit Fraud centres on undisclosed earnings with means-tested benefits.
As a minimum repayment take deductions from benefits of £15 per week - they can earn this without reduction in benefits if they still have a valid entitlement! That way those on the poverty line are not financially worse off - we have a social duty to support those in need, we can't remove benefits! They just have to carry on working but for no pay.
Many living together cases could be treated the same way as there is an underlying entitlement to Tax Credits or benefits. For the more serious cases enforce higher financial sanctions - hit them in their pockets.
As a basic principle we must ensure that the only time an overpayment is written off is after the fraudster's death. Slap a legal charge on any property they might own and recover it from the proceeds of sale. There are powers to seize assets - use them every time.
Last but not least; by way of a penalty add interest to the overpayment otherwise this still motivates the fraudster - we'd all love an interest free loan! The interest rate needs to be linked to the size of the overpayment - the bigger the overpayment the higher the rate.
11 Aug 2010
First benefit fraud proposal misses the point
The government proposes that credit rating agencies should be paid to identify benefit fraudsters.
Comment thus far has focused on two concerns.
First, privacy. For instance, Big Brother Watch claims that "mining private data on a routine basis on the off-chance of catching people out is a disproportionate invasion of privacy".
If the companies only catch very few people, they will stop doing it because it won't be worth their while. As one commenter here says, "Any investigator who doesn't already use the agencies as part of their initial enquiries should be fired!".
The right principle is that if you are living on the taxpayers, the taxpayers are entitled to do prima facie checks that your claims look honest. If you live off taxpayers, you should expect to give up some rights to financial privacy. The only difference is that checks will be run on a statistical basis rather than ad hoc when an investigator is already looking at a case. Checks which do not throw up any possible anomalies will doubtless never even be individually listed. Why would a company bother?
Experian says it already has a contract to look into new housing benefit claimants, in a deal agreed by the previous government. It expects the annual saving to be £17m.
A second objection has more weight. Investigators are not short of cases to investigate - unsurprising if there are several thousand investigators for millions of claimants.
That's not even the main blockage. Of those cases which do get investigated, many which could be prosecuted are not - again through lack of resources.
If the government wants to bring more benefit thieves to book, it will have to simplify the processes of investigation and prosecution without compromising civil liberties - no simple matter.
If the government wants to cut the number of offenders, it should increase the penalties. These people do it for the money. So hit them in the pocket. It was money that motivated them, and a financial penalty will help to deter them. Everyone convicted of benefit fraud who doesn't go to prison should have to do unpaid work. Benefit thieves should also have to repay twice what they've stolen, and should not be eligible for any further benefits – including tax credits - until they have. A confiscation order should be automatic and immediate.
The DWP says that more details about how credit reference agencies could be used will be inclided in a review by Iain Duncan Smith, who will report to the PM in the autumn about the best ways to reduce fraud and errors.
Benefit fraud is way above the government's central figure of £1bn - more like £3.5bn or more. Increasing the number of cases for investigation won't dent those figures.
Comment thus far has focused on two concerns.
First, privacy. For instance, Big Brother Watch claims that "mining private data on a routine basis on the off-chance of catching people out is a disproportionate invasion of privacy".
If the companies only catch very few people, they will stop doing it because it won't be worth their while. As one commenter here says, "Any investigator who doesn't already use the agencies as part of their initial enquiries should be fired!".
The right principle is that if you are living on the taxpayers, the taxpayers are entitled to do prima facie checks that your claims look honest. If you live off taxpayers, you should expect to give up some rights to financial privacy. The only difference is that checks will be run on a statistical basis rather than ad hoc when an investigator is already looking at a case. Checks which do not throw up any possible anomalies will doubtless never even be individually listed. Why would a company bother?
Experian says it already has a contract to look into new housing benefit claimants, in a deal agreed by the previous government. It expects the annual saving to be £17m.
A second objection has more weight. Investigators are not short of cases to investigate - unsurprising if there are several thousand investigators for millions of claimants.
That's not even the main blockage. Of those cases which do get investigated, many which could be prosecuted are not - again through lack of resources.
If the government wants to bring more benefit thieves to book, it will have to simplify the processes of investigation and prosecution without compromising civil liberties - no simple matter.
If the government wants to cut the number of offenders, it should increase the penalties. These people do it for the money. So hit them in the pocket. It was money that motivated them, and a financial penalty will help to deter them. Everyone convicted of benefit fraud who doesn't go to prison should have to do unpaid work. Benefit thieves should also have to repay twice what they've stolen, and should not be eligible for any further benefits – including tax credits - until they have. A confiscation order should be automatic and immediate.
The DWP says that more details about how credit reference agencies could be used will be inclided in a review by Iain Duncan Smith, who will report to the PM in the autumn about the best ways to reduce fraud and errors.
Benefit fraud is way above the government's central figure of £1bn - more like £3.5bn or more. Increasing the number of cases for investigation won't dent those figures.
10 Aug 2010
Immigrants in organised benefits fraud
As a fraud investigator for the council, he was supposed to flag up suspicious financial claims. But as it turned out, Badrul Islam was actually conducting a lucrative con of his own.
His scam worked remarkably well for about 18 months, enabling him to divert £200,000 in ghost ‘rent’ payments to two landlords.
But last week, the plot was uncovered - and he and his co-conspirators were jailed.
Islam, 46, had joined Newham council, in East London, in 1994. He was a trusted employee, made a senior benefits officer, and was later in charge of overseeing payments in the benefits office.
However, three years ago an internal audit uncovered a series of back-dated claims to two local property agents.
Investigators discovered that Islam had created a series of claims in the names of people who had previously been claimants but were no longer receiving money.
Islam also reactivated dormant claims but instead of sending the money to individual landlords, he diverted large amounts to the offices of property agent and landlord Dulal Haque, 40, and to his friend Moinuddin Ahmed, also a landlord.
A council source explained: ‘The fraud was simple and clever. These people had once claimed but were not claiming in May 2007. All Islam had to do was reactivate their names and make sure Haque and Ahmed got the cash.’
No checks then. He really could pay money away unsupervised?
In almost two years Islam diverted £125,000 to Haque, who ran estate agencies in Forest Gate, East London. He also sent £71,934 to Ahmed, 54, who ran a property agency in nearby East Ham.
Judge Caroline Wright, at Inner London Crown Court, told Islam, who was sacked by the council: ‘You were in a position of trust and you then exploited others too - you exploited the system.’
She jailed Islam, of Stratford, East London, for two years and four months, Haque, of Forest Gate, for 12 months and Ahmed, of Manor Park, for 14 months.
The men all admitted their guilt to a total of four counts of conspiracy to defraud at earlier court hearings.
All three, who are understood to have been born in Bangladesh, will face confiscation proceedings and will be forced to sell their assets to repay the £200,000.
A council source said: ‘They have stolen money from hard-working taxpayers and we are determined to get it back.’
They should have to pay back more than they stole. They stole for money, and a financial penalty would hurt them.
His scam worked remarkably well for about 18 months, enabling him to divert £200,000 in ghost ‘rent’ payments to two landlords.
But last week, the plot was uncovered - and he and his co-conspirators were jailed.
Islam, 46, had joined Newham council, in East London, in 1994. He was a trusted employee, made a senior benefits officer, and was later in charge of overseeing payments in the benefits office.
However, three years ago an internal audit uncovered a series of back-dated claims to two local property agents.
Investigators discovered that Islam had created a series of claims in the names of people who had previously been claimants but were no longer receiving money.
Islam also reactivated dormant claims but instead of sending the money to individual landlords, he diverted large amounts to the offices of property agent and landlord Dulal Haque, 40, and to his friend Moinuddin Ahmed, also a landlord.
A council source explained: ‘The fraud was simple and clever. These people had once claimed but were not claiming in May 2007. All Islam had to do was reactivate their names and make sure Haque and Ahmed got the cash.’
No checks then. He really could pay money away unsupervised?
In almost two years Islam diverted £125,000 to Haque, who ran estate agencies in Forest Gate, East London. He also sent £71,934 to Ahmed, 54, who ran a property agency in nearby East Ham.
Judge Caroline Wright, at Inner London Crown Court, told Islam, who was sacked by the council: ‘You were in a position of trust and you then exploited others too - you exploited the system.’
She jailed Islam, of Stratford, East London, for two years and four months, Haque, of Forest Gate, for 12 months and Ahmed, of Manor Park, for 14 months.
The men all admitted their guilt to a total of four counts of conspiracy to defraud at earlier court hearings.
All three, who are understood to have been born in Bangladesh, will face confiscation proceedings and will be forced to sell their assets to repay the £200,000.
A council source said: ‘They have stolen money from hard-working taxpayers and we are determined to get it back.’
They should have to pay back more than they stole. They stole for money, and a financial penalty would hurt them.
9 Aug 2010
DWP official in benefits scam
Another official who has been able to give away our money unchecked.
A benefits officer who gave away thousands of pounds of government cash to friends as part of a bogus loans scam has been jailed.
Amy Warhurst, 29, dished out nearly £36,000 in loans intended for some of the most impoverished families in Greater Manchester.
Warhurst, a junior manager at the Department of Work and Pensions in Chorlton, used her knowledge of the benefits system to bypass safeguards so she could sanction the loans for her friends and associates. In return they each paid her a £30 fee for arranging the loans.
When others found out about the scam through word of mouth, they contacted her via Facebook in a bid for a hand-out.
The interest-free loans were aimed to help impoverished families deal with one-off payments for emergency repairs or bills. But Warhurst processed loans for a total of 52 people who did not need them, arranging the payments, which normally take weeks to finalise, in a matter of minutes.
Manchester Crown Court heard how some of those who benefited were friends or acquaintances of Warhurst, who has since been sacked from her job. Fraud investigators were alerted to Warhurst’s activities following an anonymous phone tip-off. It was later revealed the tip-off came from her estranged partner James Chester.
So the DWP's internal systems and checks had detected nothing amiss.
Warhurst denied benefiting from setting up the ‘fee’ for arranging the loans, blaming Chester for forcing her to carry out the scam – with the arrangement fees going to him.
Chester, 30, of Thornley Lane, Timperley, denied playing any organising role in the scam, although he admitted receiving loans into his own account. He was sentenced to 21 weeks in jail.
Warhurst, formerly of Moorfield Grove, Sale, who now lives in North Wales, admitted conspiracy to defraud. She was jailed for 45 weeks.
Teresa Loftus, prosecuting, said: "These loans are intended for people in dire need, who are in emergency situations.
"We accept that in some of the cases, the money would have been paid back but the point is that they were awarded illegally."
Prosecutors admitted that many of those who received the loans would have eventually have had to pay back the cash, but said that others could have gone unnoticed.
Warhurst and Chester were sentenced along with seven others who received money through the scam and who pleaded guilty to a variety of benefit fraud offences.
Ayelsa Smith, 25, of Hurst Avenue, Sale, was jailed for 21 weeks after she admitted conspiracy to commit benefit fraud. She had recruited Warhurst’s loan customers.
The following, who were given loans, admitted benefit fraud:
A benefits officer who gave away thousands of pounds of government cash to friends as part of a bogus loans scam has been jailed.
Amy Warhurst, 29, dished out nearly £36,000 in loans intended for some of the most impoverished families in Greater Manchester.
Warhurst, a junior manager at the Department of Work and Pensions in Chorlton, used her knowledge of the benefits system to bypass safeguards so she could sanction the loans for her friends and associates. In return they each paid her a £30 fee for arranging the loans.
When others found out about the scam through word of mouth, they contacted her via Facebook in a bid for a hand-out.
The interest-free loans were aimed to help impoverished families deal with one-off payments for emergency repairs or bills. But Warhurst processed loans for a total of 52 people who did not need them, arranging the payments, which normally take weeks to finalise, in a matter of minutes.
Manchester Crown Court heard how some of those who benefited were friends or acquaintances of Warhurst, who has since been sacked from her job. Fraud investigators were alerted to Warhurst’s activities following an anonymous phone tip-off. It was later revealed the tip-off came from her estranged partner James Chester.
So the DWP's internal systems and checks had detected nothing amiss.
Warhurst denied benefiting from setting up the ‘fee’ for arranging the loans, blaming Chester for forcing her to carry out the scam – with the arrangement fees going to him.
Chester, 30, of Thornley Lane, Timperley, denied playing any organising role in the scam, although he admitted receiving loans into his own account. He was sentenced to 21 weeks in jail.
Warhurst, formerly of Moorfield Grove, Sale, who now lives in North Wales, admitted conspiracy to defraud. She was jailed for 45 weeks.
Teresa Loftus, prosecuting, said: "These loans are intended for people in dire need, who are in emergency situations.
"We accept that in some of the cases, the money would have been paid back but the point is that they were awarded illegally."
Prosecutors admitted that many of those who received the loans would have eventually have had to pay back the cash, but said that others could have gone unnoticed.
Warhurst and Chester were sentenced along with seven others who received money through the scam and who pleaded guilty to a variety of benefit fraud offences.
Ayelsa Smith, 25, of Hurst Avenue, Sale, was jailed for 21 weeks after she admitted conspiracy to commit benefit fraud. She had recruited Warhurst’s loan customers.
The following, who were given loans, admitted benefit fraud:
- Stacey Drummond, 31, of Plowden Road, Manchester, was given a 12-week suspended prison sentence, a six-month supervision order and placed under curfew.
- Michael Gleeson, 26, of Petersfield Drive, Baguley, was given 80 hours of community service.
- Steven Heywood, 25, of Morden Road, Manchester, was given 40 hours of community service.
- Gary King, 27, of Swale Cliff Avenue, Manchester, must complete 80 hours of community service.
- Daniel Vesey, 26, of Garncombe Close, Wythenshawe, was given an eight-week suspended jail sentence and also ordered to carry out 80 hours of community service.
- Thomas Chester, 27, of Sandilane Road, Manchester, was given a 12-week suspended jail sentence.
"I was better off on the dole"
A man who works as a minibus driver for the disabled has been found guilty of benefit fraud.
Magistrates found Eugene Conn guilty of claiming working tax credit and failing to notify Bracknell Forest Council which paid him housing and council tax benefits.
Speaking after the verdict at Bracknell Magistrates Court last Wednesday, Mr Conn told the News: "It proves a point, when you are unemployed you are better off. I think it is ridiculous for something like that."
The prosecution had argued that the 59-year-old knew that any receipt of working tax credit would affect his entitlement to benefit and that he failed to give prompt notification of his change in circumstance.
It was calculated that this resulted in an overpayment of £1,669.41 - £1,222.75 in housing benefits and £446.66 in council tax benefit.
Donald Adams, prosecuting, said: "On January 6, 2009, he signed a declaration stating he was neither receiving nor waiting to hear from family tax credit or working tax credit.
"From January 5, 2009, he was receiving working tax credit which he had not disclosed to the council."
Bracknell Forest investigation officer Sandra Skelt confirmed that Mr Conn would have signed a number of declarations on his benefit forms that would have requested that any change in income would need to be declared.
Defending, Ian Brownhill told the court that Mr Conn was better off on benefits than working, as he received £270 per month working and £300 per month on jobseekers' allowance.
He added that Mr Conn had given bank statements which indicated that he was in receipt of working tax credits and he did not know his mistake until his interview under caution in December 2009.
Mr Brownhill asked: "Can you be sure this defendant failed to provide details of working tax credits?"
Magistrate Kay Morton sent Mr Conn for sentencing at Slough Magistrates Court on September 8, recommending a community punishment, and said: "The process of our sentence is punishment and rehabilitation."
l Mr Conn said he will appeal against the verdict and is asking anyone in a similar situation to contact him via the News on 01344 456611.
Magistrates found Eugene Conn guilty of claiming working tax credit and failing to notify Bracknell Forest Council which paid him housing and council tax benefits.
Speaking after the verdict at Bracknell Magistrates Court last Wednesday, Mr Conn told the News: "It proves a point, when you are unemployed you are better off. I think it is ridiculous for something like that."
The prosecution had argued that the 59-year-old knew that any receipt of working tax credit would affect his entitlement to benefit and that he failed to give prompt notification of his change in circumstance.
It was calculated that this resulted in an overpayment of £1,669.41 - £1,222.75 in housing benefits and £446.66 in council tax benefit.
Donald Adams, prosecuting, said: "On January 6, 2009, he signed a declaration stating he was neither receiving nor waiting to hear from family tax credit or working tax credit.
"From January 5, 2009, he was receiving working tax credit which he had not disclosed to the council."
Bracknell Forest investigation officer Sandra Skelt confirmed that Mr Conn would have signed a number of declarations on his benefit forms that would have requested that any change in income would need to be declared.
Defending, Ian Brownhill told the court that Mr Conn was better off on benefits than working, as he received £270 per month working and £300 per month on jobseekers' allowance.
He added that Mr Conn had given bank statements which indicated that he was in receipt of working tax credits and he did not know his mistake until his interview under caution in December 2009.
Mr Brownhill asked: "Can you be sure this defendant failed to provide details of working tax credits?"
Magistrate Kay Morton sent Mr Conn for sentencing at Slough Magistrates Court on September 8, recommending a community punishment, and said: "The process of our sentence is punishment and rehabilitation."
l Mr Conn said he will appeal against the verdict and is asking anyone in a similar situation to contact him via the News on 01344 456611.
6 Aug 2010
Jail for single person fraudster
A mother jailed for 12 months for a £50,000 benefits fraud has been allowed 98 YEARS to pay the cash back.
Shameless Karen Thom, 42, had claimed she was a single parent to four kids when she was really living with her husband Ian.
She was ordered to pay back the sum - pocketed over a near five-year period - at just £19.50 a fortnight.
Thom and her husband had split briefly in 2002 but soon got back together again. A Department of Work and Pensions fraud team discovered they were still together in Rothienorman, Aberdeenshire. Defence lawyer David Sutherland told Aberdeen Sheriff Court Thom's husband spent up to £200 going out at weekends while she stayed at home with their kids.
Mr Sutherland added: "They had a stormy marriage. She has incredibly low confidence and self-esteem."
She admitted the scam from February 2003 to December 2007.
Jailing her, Sheriff James Tierney said an "example would have to be made".
Shameless Karen Thom, 42, had claimed she was a single parent to four kids when she was really living with her husband Ian.
She was ordered to pay back the sum - pocketed over a near five-year period - at just £19.50 a fortnight.
Thom and her husband had split briefly in 2002 but soon got back together again. A Department of Work and Pensions fraud team discovered they were still together in Rothienorman, Aberdeenshire. Defence lawyer David Sutherland told Aberdeen Sheriff Court Thom's husband spent up to £200 going out at weekends while she stayed at home with their kids.
Mr Sutherland added: "They had a stormy marriage. She has incredibly low confidence and self-esteem."
She admitted the scam from February 2003 to December 2007.
Jailing her, Sheriff James Tierney said an "example would have to be made".
5 Aug 2010
A social housing fraud
With the shortage of social housing in the news, here's a report of a social housing fraud - part of a much wider problem.
Jodie Harwood, a former Jephson Housing Association tenant from Sheepridge, was convicted at Bradford Crown Court of housing benefit fraud.
Harwood, 32, pleaded guilty to the offences.
The court was told she had a social housing tenancy in Sheepridge but claimed over £3,500 housing benefit to cover rent when she did not live in the property.
The judge was told Harwood was not only committing housing benefit fraud but was also committing social tenancy fraud, depriving others in need of a home.
She was given a community order of 160 hours unpaid work to be completed within 12 months. She will also continue to repay the council the money she falsely claimed.
Kirklees Council brought the successful prosecution against Ms Harwood.
A spokesman said: “Housing benefit fraud and social housing fraud costs the public money, in benefits and potential temporary accommodation.
“There are other social and health costs, which run to thousands of pounds because of such activities.”
The spokesman added: “When someone with a council or housing association property rents it out without permission or obtains a home by providing false information they are committing housing fraud.
“They often continue to pay the rent for the property directly to their landlord, but charge the person they are subletting to a much higher rate.”
Clr Shabir Pandor, Cabinet Member with responsibility for Housing, said: “Kirklees Council take fraud very seriously.
“Our counter fraud team in Customer and Exchequer Service take referrals and, using their expertise and information sources, investigate any suspected cases.
“They have used their legal powers to stop the fraud by Ms Harwood and bring about this successful prosecution. This means the tenancy can be offered to someone in need”.
Jodie Harwood, a former Jephson Housing Association tenant from Sheepridge, was convicted at Bradford Crown Court of housing benefit fraud.
Harwood, 32, pleaded guilty to the offences.
The court was told she had a social housing tenancy in Sheepridge but claimed over £3,500 housing benefit to cover rent when she did not live in the property.
The judge was told Harwood was not only committing housing benefit fraud but was also committing social tenancy fraud, depriving others in need of a home.
She was given a community order of 160 hours unpaid work to be completed within 12 months. She will also continue to repay the council the money she falsely claimed.
Kirklees Council brought the successful prosecution against Ms Harwood.
A spokesman said: “Housing benefit fraud and social housing fraud costs the public money, in benefits and potential temporary accommodation.
“There are other social and health costs, which run to thousands of pounds because of such activities.”
The spokesman added: “When someone with a council or housing association property rents it out without permission or obtains a home by providing false information they are committing housing fraud.
“They often continue to pay the rent for the property directly to their landlord, but charge the person they are subletting to a much higher rate.”
Clr Shabir Pandor, Cabinet Member with responsibility for Housing, said: “Kirklees Council take fraud very seriously.
“Our counter fraud team in Customer and Exchequer Service take referrals and, using their expertise and information sources, investigate any suspected cases.
“They have used their legal powers to stop the fraud by Ms Harwood and bring about this successful prosecution. This means the tenancy can be offered to someone in need”.
4 Aug 2010
Councillor makes ludicrous benefit fraud claim
An Edgware bartender claimed he was “unlucky” to be caught using bogus bank statements to try to get illegal benefits.
Arsim Bajrami rustled up the fake NatWest statements in a bid to conceal from Harrow Council £300 coming into his account.
But Bajrami, of Station Road, Edgware, used a different font on the statement and a council officer soon flagged the suspicious documents up to the anti-fraud team.
The would-be benefit cheat was hauled in for questioning and claimed another person was paying their wages into his bank account.
When asked why he had not just explained this, he said: “Because you wouldn’t have believed me” and claimed he was “unlucky” that the officer spotted the bogus papers.
By the time he was caught, Bajrami had already claimed more than £4,000 in housing and council tax benefits he was not entitled to.
Bajrami pleaded guilty to using the fake documents and was ordered to complete 100 hours community service.
He was also told to cough up £500 in court costs.
Councillor Graham Henson, who is in charge of the benefit fraud team at Harrow Council, said:
Arsim Bajrami rustled up the fake NatWest statements in a bid to conceal from Harrow Council £300 coming into his account.
But Bajrami, of Station Road, Edgware, used a different font on the statement and a council officer soon flagged the suspicious documents up to the anti-fraud team.
The would-be benefit cheat was hauled in for questioning and claimed another person was paying their wages into his bank account.
When asked why he had not just explained this, he said: “Because you wouldn’t have believed me” and claimed he was “unlucky” that the officer spotted the bogus papers.
By the time he was caught, Bajrami had already claimed more than £4,000 in housing and council tax benefits he was not entitled to.
Bajrami pleaded guilty to using the fake documents and was ordered to complete 100 hours community service.
He was also told to cough up £500 in court costs.
Councillor Graham Henson, who is in charge of the benefit fraud team at Harrow Council, said:
We will not tolerate efforts to fraudulently take money from the public purse.The tool used here from the huge range being that the benefits officer used his eyes.
I hope this case serves as a warning that we have a huge range of tools at our disposal to catch out cheats and bring them to book.
3 Aug 2010
Some 'disabled' aren't disabled
A disabled man who claimed he was crippled with arthritis was exposed as a benefits cheat — when he was spotted refereeing football matches.
Terry Langford, aged 62, from Horwich, got the highest level of allowance and was also receiving care because he said he was unable to cook or dress himself.
But yesterday, a video was played to a court which showed him:
● Kicking a football while officiating a game
● Running up and down the pitch to keep up with players
● Ducking under a fence when making his way on to the pitch
● Bending over to collect his possessions at the end of a game.
At Bolton Magistrates’ Court, Langford pleaded guilty to failing to notify the Department of Work and Pensions of a change in circumstances which would affect his entitlement to disability living allowance.
Joanne Tang, prosecuting on behalf of the Department for Work and Pensions, said: “He claimed he was virtually unable to walk and could only go short distances before needing to stop and rest.
“It is his responsibility to inform the DWP about any changes or improvements in his disability.
“Video footage was taken of him when he was refereeing and he was seen walking 100 yards from one end of the pitch to the other, and jogging and keeping up with play. He was able to stop, start, swivel and turn.”
The court heard Langford had been claiming benefits since 1987 after being diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis which affected his hands, knees, feet and hips.
However, officials from the Department of Work and Pensions received a tip-off to the Benefit Fraud Hotline in 2009, claiming Langford’s condition was not as bad as he was claiming.
An undercover surveillance operation was launched which led to him being filmed while officiating at a number of junior league football matches for the North West Football League in September.
Video footage also shows Langford stopping to issue a yellow card.
He is seen in another match bending over to pick up belongings and talking to spectators. The court heard he had officiated for the North West Football League from 2008 to 2010.
Adam Whittaker, defending, said: “It is not a suggestion that he had set out to defraud the department or that there was any element of dishonesty.
“He came to my office in June with a summons and was very upset. He is of impeccable previous character.
“He was refereeing for junior matches as part of his rehabilitation exercises, as suggested by a specialist consultant.”
Langford was given a conditional discharge for 12 months and ordered to pay £75 costs. It was calculated he was overpaid £2,777 which he must repay.
After the case, Anti-fraud Minister Lord Freud said:
Outside court, Langford said: “I was encouraged to try and be as active as possible.
This was bloody mindedness and willpower drove me to do this, but it is considered to be too much for my condition.
“I did not do this on purpose and would not have done this if I thought it was illegal. I am sorry for any inconvenience I have caused anyone and I feel like crying.” And he expects us to believe this?
Terry Langford, aged 62, from Horwich, got the highest level of allowance and was also receiving care because he said he was unable to cook or dress himself.
But yesterday, a video was played to a court which showed him:
● Kicking a football while officiating a game
● Running up and down the pitch to keep up with players
● Ducking under a fence when making his way on to the pitch
● Bending over to collect his possessions at the end of a game.
At Bolton Magistrates’ Court, Langford pleaded guilty to failing to notify the Department of Work and Pensions of a change in circumstances which would affect his entitlement to disability living allowance.
Joanne Tang, prosecuting on behalf of the Department for Work and Pensions, said: “He claimed he was virtually unable to walk and could only go short distances before needing to stop and rest.
“It is his responsibility to inform the DWP about any changes or improvements in his disability.
“Video footage was taken of him when he was refereeing and he was seen walking 100 yards from one end of the pitch to the other, and jogging and keeping up with play. He was able to stop, start, swivel and turn.”
The court heard Langford had been claiming benefits since 1987 after being diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis which affected his hands, knees, feet and hips.
However, officials from the Department of Work and Pensions received a tip-off to the Benefit Fraud Hotline in 2009, claiming Langford’s condition was not as bad as he was claiming.
An undercover surveillance operation was launched which led to him being filmed while officiating at a number of junior league football matches for the North West Football League in September.
Video footage also shows Langford stopping to issue a yellow card.
He is seen in another match bending over to pick up belongings and talking to spectators. The court heard he had officiated for the North West Football League from 2008 to 2010.
Adam Whittaker, defending, said: “It is not a suggestion that he had set out to defraud the department or that there was any element of dishonesty.
“He came to my office in June with a summons and was very upset. He is of impeccable previous character.
“He was refereeing for junior matches as part of his rehabilitation exercises, as suggested by a specialist consultant.”
Langford was given a conditional discharge for 12 months and ordered to pay £75 costs. It was calculated he was overpaid £2,777 which he must repay.
After the case, Anti-fraud Minister Lord Freud said:
It is cases like these that show us why welfare reform is needed.
We have a duty to the taxpayer and our customers to make sure that these vital benefits only go to those who need them.
Benefit fraud takes money away from the most vulnerable. It is a crime and we are committed to stopping it by catching criminals at the front line and making sure our reforms make the benefit system less open to abuse.
Outside court, Langford said: “I was encouraged to try and be as active as possible.
This was bloody mindedness and willpower drove me to do this, but it is considered to be too much for my condition.
“I did not do this on purpose and would not have done this if I thought it was illegal. I am sorry for any inconvenience I have caused anyone and I feel like crying.” And he expects us to believe this?
A reader writes ...
Would you please have a section for the 1000s of people dragged erroneously through the criminal courts for benefit fraud, and when found not guilty under ss. 111A or 112A of SSAA, the DWP still attempts to pursue them for benefit overpayments under s. 71(1) SSAA - when it is unlawful to do so - by deducting from benefits (they are unable to recover at common law). How is this just and how can the DWP unjustly enrich itself and claim to be doing it with the blessing of the State (when it is completely unlawful)?
2 Aug 2010
Benefit fraud as part of criminality - Romanians again
A man and a woman from Romania have each been jailed for 30 months for forcing six children to beg in London, reports the BBC.
The man, 36, and woman, 33, pleaded guilty to child neglect at Reading Crown Court. The man also admitted four counts of fraud and money-laundering.
The children were forced to beg on the streets for up to 12 hours a day, not sent to school and had no access to doctors. Some had cigarette burn marks.
The pair trafficked the children to the UK, Metropolitan (Met) Police said.
The couple, who worked for a gang based in Romania, were arrested in the house they shared with the children in Berkshire, in October 2009 following months of surveillance as part of Operation Golf.
The surveillance on the pair began after the Met identified that one of about 1,000 children trafficked by a gang in the south-eastern town of Tanderei, Romania, was living in the UK with the couple.
The Met said the Romanian gang involved in this case thought each child could earn about £100,000 a year by begging or stealing.
The woman would escort the children and directed their operations in various locations, including Southall, Westminster and Wembley, and Luton.
Ch Insp Colin Carswell, from Operation Golf, said: "This was a case of prolonged and premeditated abuse.
"They (the children) were told they could not get school places while in reality the adults concerned had not enrolled them, they were denied access to healthcare and, once removed from the couple, several of the children were found to have scars consistent with cigarette or cigar burns.
"Another of the children needed seven tooth extractions.
"We believe that this man and woman were in league with a Romanian organised criminal network in order to exploit and abuse these children, that this gang facilitated movement of them throughout Europe and that the profits generated by the children were significant with a proportion finding its way back to Romania to help fund lavish lifestyles for the gangsters."
The man admitted to one count of child neglect relating to failing to educate the children, four counts of fraud, including benefit fraud, and one count of money laundering.
He was ordered to serve a minimum of 15 months. A second charge of child neglect relating to begging will lie on file.
The woman admitted to one count of child neglect for failing to educate the children and another count of child neglect relating to exploiting them for begging. She was also ordered to serve a minimum of 15 months.
The man, 36, and woman, 33, pleaded guilty to child neglect at Reading Crown Court. The man also admitted four counts of fraud and money-laundering.
The children were forced to beg on the streets for up to 12 hours a day, not sent to school and had no access to doctors. Some had cigarette burn marks.
The pair trafficked the children to the UK, Metropolitan (Met) Police said.
The couple, who worked for a gang based in Romania, were arrested in the house they shared with the children in Berkshire, in October 2009 following months of surveillance as part of Operation Golf.
The surveillance on the pair began after the Met identified that one of about 1,000 children trafficked by a gang in the south-eastern town of Tanderei, Romania, was living in the UK with the couple.
The Met said the Romanian gang involved in this case thought each child could earn about £100,000 a year by begging or stealing.
The woman would escort the children and directed their operations in various locations, including Southall, Westminster and Wembley, and Luton.
Ch Insp Colin Carswell, from Operation Golf, said: "This was a case of prolonged and premeditated abuse.
"They (the children) were told they could not get school places while in reality the adults concerned had not enrolled them, they were denied access to healthcare and, once removed from the couple, several of the children were found to have scars consistent with cigarette or cigar burns.
"Another of the children needed seven tooth extractions.
"We believe that this man and woman were in league with a Romanian organised criminal network in order to exploit and abuse these children, that this gang facilitated movement of them throughout Europe and that the profits generated by the children were significant with a proportion finding its way back to Romania to help fund lavish lifestyles for the gangsters."
The man admitted to one count of child neglect relating to failing to educate the children, four counts of fraud, including benefit fraud, and one count of money laundering.
He was ordered to serve a minimum of 15 months. A second charge of child neglect relating to begging will lie on file.
The woman admitted to one count of child neglect for failing to educate the children and another count of child neglect relating to exploiting them for begging. She was also ordered to serve a minimum of 15 months.
Three further charges relating to trafficking seven children into the UK will lie on file.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)