A FRAUDSTER conned the Department of Social Security out of almost £6,000 by claiming benefit for his children up to 16 months after they were taken into care.
David Bradbury swindled £5,712.21 from the department between June, 1999, and June, last year, despite the fact that he stopped looking after his boys in February, 1999.
He appeared before Droitwich magistrates yesterday, charged with three counts of deception and asked for 55 other offences to be considered.
David Williams, prosecuting for the DSS, said 30-year-old Bradbury was claiming income support on the basis he was a single parent with two sons, Andrew and Matthew.
"He normally collected his benefits by way of an order book in the post office," Mr Williams said.
"Each time he signed the usual declaration that his circumstances hadn't changed.
"It was then established that on February 25, 1999, his two children were placed in local authority care, where they have remained ever since. Bradbury didn't report this fact to the Benefits Agency."
Mr Williams said that Bradbury, of Randwick Drive, Warndon, Worcester, was interviewed by the Department of Social Security.
He admitted deception on April 10, May 8 and June 5, 2000.
"There are a number of other offences relating to dishonesty - in particular, one which is similar to the one before the court today," Mr Williams added.
He said the Benefits Agency was trying to claw back the £5,712 by deducting £5.40 a fortnight.
Richard Wilkes, defending, asked the bench to consider ordering pre-sentence reports.
"Given the amount that's been overpaid, you might feel that this isn't a matter you can proceed with today," he said.
Magistrates adjourned the case until Monday, December 3, for reports.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article