A council worker exposed as a benefits cheat after boasting to colleagues that the town hall was paying his rent as well as his wages has got his old job back.Errr…
Andrew Wood, 45, falsely claimed more than £50,000 from the local authority that employed him over a six-year period, and he was sacked after admitting the fraud.The back pay is just the icing on the cake, isn’t it? Or the two-fingered salute to the taxpayer…
But yesterday it emerged that a panel of councillors has reinstated him - even giving him four months' back pay - in a decision condemned by campaigners.
His appeal was backed on the grounds that he had 'significant literacy difficulties and was a man of low intelligence,' and also that the claim was originally made by his partner, Michelle Brown.So, he’s too dumb to be punished for fraud, but dumb enough to work for the council?
Just fantastic…
Brown, 37, initially made legitimate claims in 2001, saying she was living alone, and was given state handouts on the basis that she was a single parent to her two children, a court was told.So, it was all her fault, and he was an innocent dupe?
But she failed to declare when Wood - an £18,000-a-year caretaker at Trafford Council - moved in to her home in Sale, Greater Manchester in 2002, and kept on claiming.
Nope:
Wood regularly took the forms into the benefits offices at the local authority which employed him, enabling them to claim income support and council tax and housing benefit on the rented property.*sigh*
By the time he was caught last year after boasting to colleagues about getting his rent paid on top of his salary, they had pocketed £52,700.
Wood was suspended for 16 months - on full pay - until he and Brown appeared in court last August, when they admitted conspiracy to defraud.And it turns out he got a lesser sentence because of the expected loss of job. Shows what the judge knew, right..?
The judge told Wood his offence was serious enough for him to be jailed, but instead imposed a suspended prison sentence because of his 'mental difficulties' - and the likelihood that he would lose his job.Is it too late to send him back?
A spokesman for Tory-controlled Trafford Council said that 'following careful consideration and taking into account mitigating circumstances', Wood was reinstated - but on a final written warning.Oh, great! Seeing as he’s a retard, will someone have to read it out to him?
The council leader expresses ‘surprise’ at this state of affairs. Not ‘utter, bowel-clenching fury’, as you might expect:
However council leader Matt Colledge said: 'The council continues to take all cases of benefit fraud extremely seriously, so I was surprised to hear of the result of this.Oh, well done, sir! That’s taking the issue forward and ensuring value for money.
'I would like to find out more about this case and the circumstances that were considered by the independent panel, with a view to putting more stringent processes in place in future.'
So the next time the council finds it’s employing a tax-cheating loud mouthed imbecile they can look the situation up in a great big council manual and check out the answer to ‘Should we give him his job back?’…
Votes of Trafford, I guess it’s up to you.
17 comments:
*Jaw drops, tea dribbles out*
(Not unlike the defendant I should imagine)
The giveaway is the reference to Wood's 'learning difficulties'.
Most Councils have a target for employing a certain number of 'disabled' people, usually around 2% of the overall workforce. By continuing to employ Wood therefore, the Council is helping itself acheive one of the 'equalities' targets imposed on it by central government.
BTW if Cameron gets in next time don't expect an abrupt end to any of this lunacy!
I didn't know there was a special category for 'Morally Disabled'.
Learning difficulties, yet still savvy enough to work his way round the benefits system.
My eldest's school is preparing the Y10 pupils for a work experience week next April. I did wonder whether it would be a lot simple for them to teach them to fill in benefits forms.
"Votes of Trafford, I guess it’s up to you"
And who do they vote for? I don't know exactly who was on the "independent" panel of councillors which reinstated him; probably this lot and I guess that all parties were represented (2 Labour 5 Conservative). Depressingly I can predict that no-one will lose his/her seat over this one.
So now the question is how much could he have ripped off if he hadn't been a retard? £100,000? £250,000?
Meanwhile, I'm wondering if it's just me, or if anyone else has noticed that whenever you meet a guy on the disability gravy train, it's never someone who lost his legs leading a platoon in Helmand Province. Nope, it's always someone with chronic claustrophobia, stress or back ache.
Councils are just corrupt - fullstop.
Just when you think it can't get any worse. I'm on a 4-day week and the missus has just been told it's redundancy with no package.
Ah, but we work for the private sector...
We'll be alright as we'll sort something out for ourselves but excuse me while I just go AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Pavlov's Cat spot on and ditto DJ.
When does the Mars shuttle leave?
DJ ...."or if anyone else has noticed that whenever you meet a guy on the disability gravy train, it's never someone who lost his legs leading a platoon in Helmand Province. Nope, it's always someone with chronic claustrophobia, stress or back ache."
Bullseye.
I've advised [to my eternal shame and considerable earthly financial comfort] thousands of benefits claimants - on t'phone, and many in person, or by post.
Lots of them have Disability Living Allowance, Incapacity Benefit, and these days the spiffy new Employment Support Allowance (motto: 'Prove you can't work and we'll give you extra.']
And in half a decade of watching your taxes shipped out to the shareholders of Bargain Booze, Gala and Sky - and apart from a few pensioners - in all that time I only recall seeing one plaster cast, one set of NHS crutches [about which the user was positively BIBLICAL about wanting to chuck them away], and one missing thumb.
Not one single guide dog, wheelchair, white-cane-and-black-specs combo, or tragically empty coat sleeve. Lots of them seem to believe in the curative powers of baseball and track and field athletics, mind you, from the clothing.
Oh, and a couple of burned-out soldiers with PTSD, according to their form-filling wives. Who knows?
And two - count and bless them - two diagnosed cancer sufferers.
Out of thousands.
And, with respect to John Page over at Benefit Fraud , it’s the people who play the game by the rules who are hoovering it up more than the liars and embezzlers.
Just wondering if there is a hidden agenda to soften things up for the MPs who are facing trial for fraud....
Absolutely true, of course. Changing the benefits system is fraught with political fear - Sir Humphrey would call it brave.
But better detection and proper penalties for benefit fraudsters needn't cost much in money and would probably be politically positive.
Even the government admits to £1.1bn annually. Several local authorities quote an annual figure of £2bn, which they equate to £80-£100 a household.
Even from various published numbers it's not hard to bump this up to £3.5bn annually, and that's doubtless the tip of the iceberg.
So yes, indeed it is smaller, but it's no drop in the ocean!
Sorry to rain on everyone's parade, but the guy was on 18 k a year. The false claim was for 52k over 6 years, or about 8 1/2k a year. What kind of fucked up world do we live in where by getting up in the morning and dragging your arse to work you are half a salary better off staying at home? Was the 18k before or after tax? He'd have been better staying at home and breeding a few more mongs. He bothered to go to work.
Our welfare system is crap!
The area is covered by three parliamentary consitituencies.
Let's see how the MPs for the area set an example.
Graham Brady (Cons, Altricham & Sale West) is in a pickle about what he has claimed for. He even claimed £600 (from you) for tax advice.
Beverley Hughes (Lab, Stretford & Urmston) spends £150 of taxpayers' cash each month cleaning her second home and regularly claims £350 - the maximum monthly food allowance. Commenters point out that they don't get their cleaner paid for by the taxpayer, even when their rental agreement specifies they have to keep the place clean.
Paul Goggins (Lab, Wythenshawe and Sale East) has a long list of claims plus a controversy over his second home - over which there is a flipping dispute - to be occupied by a friend rent-free but for which the taxpayer paid the rent. Goggins said that the friend was actually a joint owner, in which case why were we paying the rent at all? It's so complicated that I can't even work out what exactly the position is.
(Sorry, this machine is updating and not working properly - will add Goggin's links when it comes back)
I'm not suprised that some benefits claimants fail to mention it when they move in together but when it comes to rage and demands for action, I want the MPs dealt with first because they are supposed to be setting an example but all they do is say "Well, I'm special, I should have my own rules".
Here, a woman on benefits appears to have let a very low-paid worker come in to her home in an effort to give some stability and completeness to her family and to his life. Is this so terrible, assuming he is a reasonable choice of partner.
With £18k in wages - what's that worth after tax? - it doesn't amount to the fraud of the century and illustrates what Mark Wadsworth has said so often; the couple would be better off separately as that maximizes their benefit take.
Aren't they a special case? It would be better all round if they kept together, he kept his job and the children grew up knowing somebody in work who was likely to have a pension. They took £52k over seven years (around £630 per month) which is chickenfeed by MPs' standards. We should be finding a way that they can be together, not penalizing them for trying whilst providing an incentive for them to make dishonest statements.
What sickens me about these Councils (and the rest of the Public Sector come to that) is that we are forced to pay for them on pain of prison if we don't. They in return persecute us and rip us off with disproportionate fines for the slightest transgression of their many laws and regulations. We are forced to pay their pensions while in many case not being able to afford one of our own. Add to that the fact that many of them seem to be on the fiddle in one way or another as highlighted by the Westminster Crime Wave. It's like being governed by an organised crime syndicate.
"*Jaw drops, tea dribbles out*
(Not unlike the defendant I should imagine) "
Indeed! I think Maek has it right, and this was one statistic for their diversity figures they couldn't afford to give up...
"And who do they vote for?"
That's the problem, isn't it. Like the old saying goes, 'No matter who you vote for, a politician gets in..'
"So now the question is how much could he have ripped off if he hadn't been a retard?"
Well, if he'd had the brains (and the complexion) to disguise himself as a fake Somali, quite a lot more...
"Lots of them seem to believe in the curative powers of baseball and track and field athletics, mind you, from the clothing."
Rofl!
"Just wondering if there is a hidden agenda to soften things up for the MPs who are facing trial for fraud...."
"But better detection and proper penalties for benefit fraudsters needn't cost much in money and would probably be politically positive."
But as you say, it takes courage. Look at what happened to Frank Field...
"Our welfare system is crap!"
True enough, but what happeped to morality?
"Let's see how the MPs for the area set an example."
I might have guessed!
"Is this so terrible, assuming he is a reasonable choice of partner. "
Given he was a crook, I'm going to have to say 'No'...
"It's like being governed by an organised crime syndicate."
I think, on the whole, I'd rather take my chances with the organised crime syndicate! They seem to have shorter lifespans, and wouldn't cost us so much in pensions...
Post a Comment