News RSS Feed Send your news, pictures & videos


Anger over let-off for benefit fraud woman

A FRAUDSTER who claimed benefits despite her partner having £80,000 of savings in the bank has escaped with just a curfew.

The sentence was slammed by one councillor, who called it “outrageous”.

Joanne White, 36, of Sunnedon, Vange, failed to tell Basildon Council her partner had the huge stash of savings.

Between February 2009 and August 2010, White fraudulently claimed £8,000 in housing benefit and a further £1,500 in council tax benefit.

At Basildon Magistrates’ Court, she admitted failing to notify Basildon Council.

She was given an eight-week curfew, banning her going out between the hours of noon and 10pm.

But the sentence was condemned as too lenient by Phil Turner, Basildon Council’s cabinet member for finance and resources.

He said: “Any reasonable person whose partner has £80,000 in the bank would not continue to claim benefit they know they are not entitled to.

“But it never fails to amaze me how such criminal behaviour can warrant such a slap on the wrist.

“It is so disproportionate – what sort of deterrent is that for others?

“We diligently dish these cases up to the court after a thorough investigation and no referral about benefit cheats is ever not looked into.

“But when they go before the courts, all they seem to say is ‘don’t do it again’.”

White, who has since lodged an appeal against her conviction, was also ordered to pay £730 in prosecution costs.

Comments(24)

andyh says...
1:23pm Tue 27 Dec 11

Did she know that her partner had that much money? If not then she probably didn't know that she wasn't entitled to the benefit.
That particular curfew also suggest that there is more to this than meets the eye.

Diannah says...
3:05pm Tue 27 Dec 11

How strange! What is a noon to 10pm curfew going to achieve?

Nebs says...
3:47pm Tue 27 Dec 11

Judges should be elected.

stropmag says...
4:07pm Tue 27 Dec 11

andyh wrote:
Did she know that her partner had that much money? If not then she probably didn't know that she wasn't entitled to the benefit.
That particular curfew also suggest that there is more to this than meets the eye.
I think it's fair to say that she must have known. Had she been able to show that she did not have any knowledge she would not have been convicted. I believe it is a principle of English law that to be guilty of an offence there has to be what is known as 'Mens rea' or 'guilty mind'.

As for the sentence, I'm sure there are reasons for it but it does sound rather bizarre on the face of it. If I were in her shoes I'd be hot footing it down town on the stroke of 10 to live it up til the early hours and stay in bed for most of the morning whilst decent working people were toiling away to keep me. I am not in her shoes, of course.

freemason says...
5:33pm Tue 27 Dec 11

Well done judge ,wish you was a member of my lodge , about time british citizens are getting equal rights.

tepluap says...
5:47pm Tue 27 Dec 11

won;t have to go look for a job for a few weeks will she?

muffindamule says...
6:19pm Tue 27 Dec 11

I wonder what Ms. White usually gets up to outside her own four walls between noon and 10pm. Must be potentially very profitable if the punishment is to fit the crime. Perhaps she would like to tell me as I believe there might be a requirement for a stand-in over the next couple of months . If anybody else has a suggestion as to what it could be then the name's Muffin and I'll turn down nuffin (within reason).

muffindamule says...
6:27pm Tue 27 Dec 11

P.S.
If you want to tell me what it is you do Joanne I promise it will remain our little secret ! ;-)

Yours sincerely,
Muffin.

TW Basildon says...
7:53pm Tue 27 Dec 11

Same old Echo; it doesn't say if she has to pay back the money she fraudulently claimed.

TW Basildon says...
7:53pm Tue 27 Dec 11

Same old Echo; it doesn't say if she has to pay back the money she fraudulently claimed.

Skymaster says...
8:17pm Tue 27 Dec 11

Most of these magistrates must be related to the law breaking fraternity, that would explain everything.

Skymaster says...
8:17pm Tue 27 Dec 11

Most of these magistrates must be related to the law breaking fraternity, that would explain everything.

Last Poster says...
9:08pm Tue 27 Dec 11

Phil Turner said:

“Any reasonable person whose partner has £80,000 in the bank would not continue to claim benefit they know they are not entitled to.

“But it never fails to amaze me how such criminal behaviour can warrant such a slap on the wrist.

“It is so disproportionate – what sort of deterrent is that for others?

Perhaps he should quote those words when we read how MP's get off by apologising, as many did over the expenses fracas, or by hitting the "Tax Avoidance" specialists who are the kings of our failed industries with all the millions they pay themselves, sometimes paying less tax than your average bog cleanser.

Yes Mr. Turner, keep hitting the low lives by all means, but perhaps you might throw one of your rabble rousing comments upwards? just for balanced reporting of course! Or is it that you are only amazed by someone at the bottom of the ladder using the same initiative as most of those at the top?

Ironman says...
10:55pm Tue 27 Dec 11

Well said Lastposter. 100% agree.

heartbeat says...
1:08am Wed 28 Dec 11

Last Poster wrote:
Phil Turner said:

“Any reasonable person whose partner has £80,000 in the bank would not continue to claim benefit they know they are not entitled to.

“But it never fails to amaze me how such criminal behaviour can warrant such a slap on the wrist.

“It is so disproportionate – what sort of deterrent is that for others?

Perhaps he should quote those words when we read how MP's get off by apologising, as many did over the expenses fracas, or by hitting the "Tax Avoidance" specialists who are the kings of our failed industries with all the millions they pay themselves, sometimes paying less tax than your average bog cleanser.

Yes Mr. Turner, keep hitting the low lives by all means, but perhaps you might throw one of your rabble rousing comments upwards? just for balanced reporting of course! Or is it that you are only amazed by someone at the bottom of the ladder using the same initiative as most of those at the top?
Absolutely right. I don't see how people at the bottom of society's rungs can be expected to obey rules when the those at the top don't! Remember all those MPs who "forgot" they owned several houses or whatever??

Nebs says...
11:58am Wed 28 Dec 11

Steal a cheap television in a riot, get 3 years so as the message goes out that this will not be tolerated.
Steal 9,500 in benefits and get to stay at home and play on your xbox, so as the message goes out that, er, where can I pick up the benefit claim forms?

termite1944 says...
2:41pm Wed 28 Dec 11

... and who says crime doesn't pay?

She should be evicted from her home and the money she stole deducted from her bank account!

At least we know where she lives?

R85 says...
2:55pm Wed 28 Dec 11

How is the amount of money her partner had relevant in any way? Were they married? Was he giving her the money to live? Does she live with her partner who pays the bills? Why is it relevant, it’s not her money unless one of my above questions applies!!!!!! When I was younger I only just managed to get EMA to go to college, however if my parents had earned a couple of grand more I wouldn’t have! WTF why is it relevant how much my parents had, its not my money, they weren’t giving it to me…. so what nutter decided that should be the rule?? Each person is an individual! Crazy world!

alimac69 says...
3:32pm Wed 28 Dec 11

Did her partner with the £80k in the bank know she was claiming these benefits?

shallotman says...
3:41pm Wed 28 Dec 11

Would seem this Magistrate is not fit for purpose.

Altravista says...
12:46am Thu 29 Dec 11

What a strange punishment. Can't see what good a curfew would achieve, maybe the Echo would like to find out some more information for its readers to help explain? Also, did the woman have to pay back the money? Her partner could surely have afforded to!

sunshine07 says...
4:00pm Thu 29 Dec 11

I get so wound up with all this benefit business never claimed one in my life wouldnt know how to but i really think once a person lies about their situation then they should be banned from claiming any benefit at all no matter what their situation is

Soouthchurch59 says...
4:43pm Thu 29 Dec 11

'How is the amount of money her partner had relevant in any way? Were they married? Was he giving her the money to live? Does she live with her partner who pays the bills? Why is it relevant?'

I agree R85. We don't know how long this couple have been in a relationship - or anything else about their personal circumstances. Whereas the beak does and has obviously taken these into account when sentencing.

Last Poster says...
7:15pm Thu 29 Dec 11

sunshine07 wrote:
I get so wound up with all this benefit business never claimed one in my life wouldnt know how to but i really think once a person lies about their situation then they should be banned from claiming any benefit at all no matter what their situation is
Strange! What your writing about is such a small sum compared with the mass tax "avoidance" practiced by the very, very rich. Yet you get wound up by the penny pinching folk who copy the "Fiddlers on the roof" of society. Just wondered, do you employ an accountant? Nothing personal, just trying to work out your apparrent prejudice.

Local Businesses

Most popular