Bacup benefit cheat failed to say boyfriend moved in

The Bolton News: Bacup benefit cheat failed to say boyfriend moved in Bacup benefit cheat failed to say boyfriend moved in

A WOMAN claimed £3,000 benefits she wasn’t entitled to when she kept quiet about her partner moving in, a court heard.

Burnley magistrates were told how mother-of-two Gemma Ridgway, 30, had suffered violence at the hands of her boyfriend Aaron Walton, but he had ‘wormed his way’ back into her affections.

The defendant, who has never been in trouble before, of Acre Avenue, Bacup, admitted two counts of failing to notify a change in circumstances — that she was living with her boyfriend — to the Department for Work and Pensions and Burnley Council, between April and August last year.

She was given a six- month conditional discharge by District Judge James Clarke.

The defendant was also ordered to pay £50 costs and a £15 victim surcharge.

Comments (4)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

2:28pm Fri 11 Jul 14

boynesider says...

£65 for fiddling £3000 now that is a punishment/deterrent
.joke.pay back in full and no benefits till done would be nearer the mark
£65 for fiddling £3000 now that is a punishment/deterrent .joke.pay back in full and no benefits till done would be nearer the mark boynesider
  • Score: 9

10:33pm Fri 11 Jul 14

child44 says...

Hardly the crime of the century. The Government let Vodaphone off for £billions for unpaid tax. People on benefits forgetting to tell the DWP that their partner moved back in with them aren't the real villains, though Iain Duncan Smith and the DWP would have you believe they are.
Hardly the crime of the century. The Government let Vodaphone off for £billions for unpaid tax. People on benefits forgetting to tell the DWP that their partner moved back in with them aren't the real villains, though Iain Duncan Smith and the DWP would have you believe they are. child44
  • Score: 1

9:37am Wed 16 Jul 14

bacupbabe says...

boynesider wrote:
£65 for fiddling £3000 now that is a punishment/deterrent

.joke.pay back in full and no benefits till done would be nearer the mark
This woman will have to pay the benefit back. The court doesn't need to make an order for her to pay it back because the DWP can recover the benefit by using the recovery of overpayment regulations.
[quote][p][bold]boynesider[/bold] wrote: £65 for fiddling £3000 now that is a punishment/deterrent .joke.pay back in full and no benefits till done would be nearer the mark[/p][/quote]This woman will have to pay the benefit back. The court doesn't need to make an order for her to pay it back because the DWP can recover the benefit by using the recovery of overpayment regulations. bacupbabe
  • Score: 1

5:35pm Mon 21 Jul 14

nice person says...

I suppose if they gave this woman the benefits they have stolen from her in cuts,it would pay the debt and more than likely leave her with a sizeable amount.
I suppose if they gave this woman the benefits they have stolen from her in cuts,it would pay the debt and more than likely leave her with a sizeable amount. nice person
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree