Home Menu

Site Navigation


Notices

Serious Debates & News Debate and discussion about political, moral, philosophical, celebrity and news topics.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 30-05-2014, 06:36 AM #1
Ammi's Avatar
Ammi Ammi is offline
Quand il pleut, il pleut
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 63,635


Ammi Ammi is offline
Quand il pleut, il pleut
Ammi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 63,635


Default Father facing jail after claiming child benefit for 11 yrs after daughter died...

A shameless father is facing jail after he claimed almost £50,000 in child benefits for 11 years after his daughter died.


Jem Bakalej, 56, swindled thousands of pounds of taxpayers' cash in the decade-long scam, in which he pretended to be the single parent of Grace, who tragically passed away in 2001.


A court heard that between June 2001 and November 2012 he pocketed a total of £49,000 in state handouts for his daughter

Prosecutor Richard Dewsbury said Bakalej made a claim for benefits as a single parent of Grace - who was born prematurely on June 16, 2001.


But the child was actually living with her mother in Northampton and tragically died a month after her birth, on July 21, 2001.


At Northampton Crown Court last week, Bakalej pleaded guilty to three counts of cheating the public revenue


Judge Lynn Tayton told him to expect a jail term when he is sentenced next week.


The court heard Bakalej also applied to the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) in March 2002 for income support as a lone parent of Grace, eight months after his daughter died.


He continued to claim income support until November 2010, stealing a total of £35,359.64 from the taxpayer


Bakalej also claimed child tax credits as a lone parent of Grace after August 2010, worth a total of £6,806.21.


As a result of his false statements he also received £6,826 in child benefit, which he claimed until March 2011.


Mr Dewsbury told the court: 'The child benefit should have ceased to have been paid the first Monday after the child’s death in July 2001.


'But he failed to inform Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs about Grace's death, and payments continued until 2011.'


Mr Dewsbury added: 'They only ceased when he failed to respond to enquiries from HMRC.'


Bakalej lived with his partner in Northampton and she also received child benefit for their other three children, the court heard.

When interviewed by police in November 2012, Bakalej told officers he had continued to claim for his dead daughter because he 'needed the money'.


He admitted he knew it would get him a higher income and accepted that he was being greedy.


The court heard Bakalej had also applied for Social Fund Loans in 2005, 2006 and 2007 using his late daughter’s details


The court heard he has not worked since 2000 and is repaying the money back at £120 a month - which will take him 34 years to do.


The case was today adjourned until next Friday after the judge said she wanted to hear more evidence regarding Bakalej's child support arrangements.


Dia Chakravarty, Political Director at the TaxPayers' Alliance, said afterwards: 'This sad case again highlights what a complete mess our benefits system is.


'The welfare system is a safety net for the those who really need it; benefit fraudsters not only leave taxpayers unfairly out of pocket but they also take away from the most vulnerable in our society.


'There should be much better checks in place to stop people taking advantage of the system, along with strong penalties when someone's caught out, not just a slap on the wrist.


..how a parent could do something like that...
Ammi is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 30-05-2014, 06:45 AM #2
Nedusa's Avatar
Nedusa Nedusa is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: London
Posts: 4,347

Favourites (more):
CBB 10: Julian Clary
BB13: Luke A
Nedusa Nedusa is offline
Senior Member
Nedusa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: London
Posts: 4,347

Favourites (more):
CBB 10: Julian Clary
BB13: Luke A
Default

Whilst I agree this was a clear case of fraud and this man should expect some jail time, I have to wonder at the ease at which he was able to commit this fraud.

It does seem a little too easy to continue to claim and receive this benefit. Surely there should be tighter controls like cross referencing death certificates with claimants names or something similar.

Given all the resources the Govt has you would think this type of fraud would be easy to detect.
__________________
Nedusa is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 30-05-2014, 08:28 AM #3
Toy Soldier Toy Soldier is offline
-
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 30,350


Toy Soldier Toy Soldier is offline
-
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 30,350


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedusa View Post
Whilst I agree this was a clear case of fraud and this man should expect some jail time, I have to wonder at the ease at which he was able to commit this fraud.

It does seem a little too easy to continue to claim and receive this benefit. Surely there should be tighter controls like cross referencing death certificates with claimants names or something similar.

Given all the resources the Govt has you would think this type of fraud would be easy to detect.
The system is clearly far too easy to scam. After the birth of my second daughter, we somehow ended up being paid double child benefit for her due to a mix up. We couldn't remember whether it was me or my partner who was the recipient for our first child, so we just took a guess and applied under my name. Payments started soon after... But then we noticed that, separately, the payment amount for my first daughter had gone up too. Basically, our first daughter was under my partner's name, and the child benefit for our second was automatically added to that. But was also being paid to me at the same time.

We called them up and sorted it out straight away (anyone who would risk a criminal record for £14 a week can only be a complete idiot?) ... But, I suspect it's likely they would never have flagged it up if we hadn't said anything.
Toy Soldier is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 30-05-2014, 09:06 AM #4
thesheriff443 thesheriff443 is offline
thesheriff443
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 14,285


thesheriff443 thesheriff443 is offline
thesheriff443
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 14,285


Default

by continuing claiming this man was always going to be caught, its just a case of fraud, the fact that he used his dead daughter as a means to commit fraud does not add or detract from this case.
thesheriff443 is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 30-05-2014, 09:16 AM #5
Nedusa's Avatar
Nedusa Nedusa is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: London
Posts: 4,347

Favourites (more):
CBB 10: Julian Clary
BB13: Luke A
Nedusa Nedusa is offline
Senior Member
Nedusa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: London
Posts: 4,347

Favourites (more):
CBB 10: Julian Clary
BB13: Luke A
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thesheriff443 View Post
by continuing claiming this man was always going to be caught, its just a case of fraud, the fact that he used his dead daughter as a means to commit fraud does not add or detract from this case.
I agree........but the ease with which people are able to claim is almost verging on Entrapment. I mean in a moment of weakness a desparately poor family forget to cancel their recently deceased's mothers old age pension and now having continued to receive it find it hard to stop claiming it as they need the money for food and utilities. They figure it will stop soon anyhow but it continues for years.

It's only £70 a week so they figure the state wont miss it besides they have worked and paid taxes for decades and never claimed in the past. So they think morally they are entitled to it.

This is a more common scenario than most people think.

The onus should be on the Govt to put into place checks and balances that stop this type of unintentional fraud from being committed.
__________________
Nedusa is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 30-05-2014, 09:25 AM #6
Toy Soldier Toy Soldier is offline
-
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 30,350


Toy Soldier Toy Soldier is offline
-
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 30,350


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedusa View Post
I agree........but the ease with which people are able to claim is almost verging on Entrapment. I mean in a moment of weakness a desparately poor family forget to cancel their recently deceased's mothers old age pension and now having continued to receive it find it hard to stop claiming it as they need the money for food and utilities. They figure it will stop soon anyhow but it continues for years.

It's only £70 a week so they figure the state wont miss it besides they have worked and paid taxes for decades and never claimed in the past. So they think morally they are entitled to it.

This is a more common scenario than most people think.

The onus should be on the Govt to put into place checks and balances that stop this type of unintentional fraud from being committed.
As all deaths must be registered, you would think that it would be fairly simple for notification of a death to be passed on to the HMRC and DWP automatically. But apparently not. You're right it's too easy for people to fall into that trap - especially because, funerals are very expensive and are essentially "impulse purchases"... You get like a week to plan and organise finance for it, all the while still in shock and grieving over the death. So, you have people suddenly lumped with a £5000 debt before they can catch their breath, no real means to repay it... And it's easy to see why it might be tempting to keep that extra income source to cover it.
Toy Soldier is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 30-05-2014, 10:29 AM #7
thesheriff443 thesheriff443 is offline
thesheriff443
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 14,285


thesheriff443 thesheriff443 is offline
thesheriff443
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 14,285


Default

birth deaths and marriages are only registered in the county in which they happen.
more is being done to to link goverment bodies.

the distance between the death and where the father was living was a factor.
thesheriff443 is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 30-05-2014, 10:44 AM #8
Kizzy's Avatar
Kizzy Kizzy is offline
Likes cars that go boom
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 41,755


Kizzy Kizzy is offline
Likes cars that go boom
Kizzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 41,755


Default

To say we live in an age where info can be sent in milliseconds it's getting worse not better, information sharing between governmental departments should and could be better.
We're just living in a 'computer says no' fug, never getting to speak to a person or being able to connect to the correct department creates confusion and frustration for many too.
That said this man was committing fraud it seems, is it the worst case of fraud that HMRC have seen?... No.
__________________
Kizzy is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 30-05-2014, 11:17 AM #9
thesheriff443 thesheriff443 is offline
thesheriff443
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 14,285


thesheriff443 thesheriff443 is offline
thesheriff443
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 14,285


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kizzy View Post
To say we live in an age where info can be sent in milliseconds it's getting worse not better, information sharing between governmental departments should and could be better.
We're just living in a 'computer says no' fug, never getting to speak to a person or being able to connect to the correct department creates confusion and frustration for many too.
That said this man was committing fraud it seems, is it the worst case of fraud that HMRC have seen?... No.
the worst case of fraud, was weapons of mass destruction, not only did it cost billions but cost many brave men their lives.
thesheriff443 is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 30-05-2014, 11:36 AM #10
Ninastar's Avatar
Ninastar Ninastar is offline
Ninastar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 25,291

Favourites (more):
CBB15: Michelle Visage
X Factor 2014: Fleur East


Ninastar Ninastar is offline
Ninastar
Ninastar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 25,291

Favourites (more):
CBB15: Michelle Visage
X Factor 2014: Fleur East


Default

disgusting.
__________________
Ninastar is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 30-05-2014, 11:51 AM #11
armand.kay's Avatar
armand.kay armand.kay is offline
baddie
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: purgatory
Posts: 24,052

Favourites (more):
Survivor 40: Michele
CBB22: Natalie Nunn


armand.kay armand.kay is offline
baddie
armand.kay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: purgatory
Posts: 24,052

Favourites (more):
Survivor 40: Michele
CBB22: Natalie Nunn


Default

By the tittle I thought this was gonna be another case where the body was hidden and the death not reported but the fact the death was documented is surprising because of how long he did it for without getting caught out.
__________________
☾✩✹

armand.kay is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Reply

Bookmark/share this topic

Tags
11, benefit, child, claiming, daughter, died, facing, father, jail, yrs


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:41 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
 

About Us ThisisBigBrother.com

"Big Brother and UK Television Forum. Est. 2001"

 

© 2023
no new posts