A couple from Barry in Vale of Glamorgan, Wales, have been handed suspended prison sentences for benefit fraud after being convicted of conning almost £50,000 in benefits by pretending one was the other one’s landlord.
Cardiff Crown Court heard that Lace Eileen Perrett, 56, claimed both Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) and housing benefit between March 2013 and November 2017 from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and her local authority, the Vale of Glamorgan Council.
But despite claiming that she lived on her own and was unable to work her partner, it transpired that her partner, Leon Ronald Harris, 58, who was registered as a Perrett’s landlord, was actually living with her.
On a form dated Monday 30th January 2017, both Perrett and Harris signed to claim benefits stating that Harris was the landlord and Perrett was the tenant.
In total the pair received in £47,111 between August 2013 and November 2017 in benefits they were not entitled to.
Prosecutor Thomas Roberts told Cardiff Crown Court: “She [Perrett] was maintaining a common household with Harris [from August 2013]. That change in circumstance was never reported.”
The court was informed that the couple went on at least three holidays between August 2013 and November 2017, enjoying trips to Bulgaria, Spain, and Greece.
However, the couple came under investigation following an anonymous online tip was reported to the DWP.
Perrett was charged with two counts of dishonestly failing to notify a change in circumstance of entitlement to social security benefit and one count of dishonestly making a false statement to obtain a benefit.
Harris was charged with one count of dishonestly making a false statement to obtain a benefit after the declaration on the form in January 2017.
Both pleaded guilty to the charges at Cardiff Magistrates Court.
The couple, which are currently paying the overpayment in monthly instalments, have both been handed suspended 12-month prison sentences suspended for 20 months.
In addition, Perrett was ordered to undertake 20 sessions of rehabilitation activities and Harris was ordered to undertake 150 hours of unpaid work.
When handing down her sentence, Judge Nicola Jones said: “This is entirely out of character for both of you and I accept you both have genuine remorse. I doubt very much either of you will commit an offence again.”
Want to comment on this story? Our focus is on providing a platform for you to share your insights and views and we welcome contributions.
If any post is considered to victimise, harass, degrade or intimidate an individual or group of individuals, then the post may be deleted and the individual immediately banned from posting in future.
Please help us by reporting comments you consider to be unduly offensive so we can review and take action if necessary. Thank you.
.jpg)
%20(002).png)
.png)
Join the conversation
Jump to latest comment and add your reply
When I was young, suspended meant hung. While that might be too harsh, a suspended sentence for a £50k fraud is far too light. Make the fraudsters repay the cash with punitive interest, like the rest of us have to do if we break current lending rules with banks etc.
When I was young, hanged was used correctly instead of hung (which is what something on a hook is)...
If this LL had a residential address elsewhere then no common household could be achieved no matter how many times the LL visited the tenant or went on holiday with them.
That residential address could be as a lodger in a residential property not belonging to the LL.
Obviously if the LL has his personal circumstances listed at the rental property then that is benefit fraud.
It would also be mortgage fraud if the LL has a BTL mortgage.
BTL lenders do not allow LL to live in their BTL properties.
So perhaps if there is a lender in this case further fraud investigations are required.
Breaching mortgage conditions is fraud and could well result in the lender calling in the loan!!!!
Then both of them will be homeless!!
Please login to comment