Page 1 of benefit fraud.. steel £16385 pay it back .......£3.75 a WEEK

saw this in the local paper

Single mother pleads guilty to benefit fraud


SINGLE mother-of-three Anne Maughan received a suspended prison sentence after pleading guilty to benefit fraud.
The 35-year-old, of Broadfield Road, Goldenhill, admitted failing to notify a change in her circumstances when claiming income support between August 2003 and August 2007. In that time she was overpaid £16,385.03.
Stoke-on-Trent Crown Court heard yesterday Maughan, who has no previous convictions, failed to tell the Department for Works and Pensions (DWP) she had capital in excess of the prescribed limits.
Iain Speed, representing the DWP, said Maughan had accounts with Britannia Building Society in which there was more than £36,000.
He said: "She was interviewed under caution in 2007. She said the money in the accounts belonged to her uncle who lived in Ireland and he used the money to buy houses and then horses."
The court heard the DWP accepted the cash belonged to her uncle.
Mr Speed said Maughan had started to repay the money at a rate of £3.75 a week.
Richard Littler, defending, said: "This is not the normal benefit fraud case.
"She was always entitled to income support. She did not disclose monies in her account that belonged to someone else.
"Those monies were always to be repaid to that individual. The only benefit she would gain would be the interest on that cash."
Judge Granville Styler accepted it was not the normal type of benefit fraud. He handed Maughan a five-month prison term, suspended for two years, with a residence requirement.

remind me why i go to work and earn a living :/

If only she had been an MP she would have gotten away with it.

what will our politicians say about this?


"good work" i suppose

blog

Reading what has been said, it was wrong. Maybe it wasn`t her uncle`s money etc, etc. Where I get angry is if I have worked hard for many years & have saved £50000-00. I am not entitled to benefit. Yet someone who gets the same amount of money & wastes it on excesive Gambling, Booze, Fags, Holidays etc & thus is left with nothing in the bank can get benefits. Something is not right.

You could argue that by spending their money, they generated more tax income for society that went towards benefits, where as by just keeping yours in the bank all you did was make banks richer.


Editor
DVD REVIEWER
MYREVIEWER.COM

"The Green Belt policy is a Labour Policy, and we intend to Build on it"
John Prescott

You could argue that by spending their money, they generated more tax income for society that went towards benefits, where as by just keeping yours in the bank all you did was make banks richer.

Good point, but someone has to pay for their pensions. :)

Where I get annoyed is when talking about retirement homes.
Two definite scenarios in those places, in my experience.

1/ People who get everything paid for because, for whatever reason, they haven`t ever owned their home and have had no savings (could well be they`re just money wasting scum their whole life)
2/ People who have owned their own home and built up some savings, only to have the bloody lot taken off them to pay the fees. >:(

My wife`s convinced the second scenario hastened her father`s death.
He wanted to leave something to his kids, but he was forced to go into a home.
He died far quicker than anyone expected, we believe because he wanted to, to avoid his kids` inheritance being swallowed up by fees.

There is a way around this, which I`m in discussions with my mother about.
Provided the property is `signed over` to relatives for 7 years prior to being placed in a home, they cannot touch it.
So I`m assisting her in doing this.
We don`t envisage her going into a home, but she doesn`t want our inheritance affected if she has to, somewhere down the line.

Thieving Gypo scum

Quote:
Provided the property is `signed over` to relatives for 7 years prior to being placed in a home, they cannot touch it.

Need to be careful when doing this, a few inheritance tax and capital gains tax issues, but without knowing exactly what you mean by "signed over" it`s hard to say.

If she gifts to you, but continues to live there, if the market value of renting that property per year is in excess of £5,000 it may also be liable to an income tax charge.

www.last.fm/user/1mills

It is, effectively, `gifting` it to us while she still lives there, yes.
The value of the property wouldn`t bother inheritance tax.
I`m aware of the £5k a year rental thing too, but it`s borderline for that.