Charity worker's £30k benefit fraud did not "fund a lavish lifestyle"

Friday 06 December 2024

A charity worker who wrongly claimed more than £30,000 in benefits has been spared a prison sentence – after the Royal Court heard that this was due to her "disorganised" nature rather than a bid to fund a "lavish lifestyle".

Marie Denise Smith was told that benefit fraud could result in time in jail.

But Jurats at the Royal Court instead sentenced her to 180 hours of community service. She was also given an 18-month probation order.

The court heard that Smith (42) had been working in The Entertainer toy shop and Autism Jersey at different periods over two-and-a-half years, and had also moved in with a former partner.

But on four different occasions she failed to inform the Social Security Department of changes to her income or living arrangements and received a total of £30,678 to which she was not entitled.

Crown Advocate Luke Sette, prosecuting, said that in November 2019 she had showed the department a letter from her then-employer, The Entertainer, confirming that her job was to end on 28 December.

However she resumed working there from April and July 2020, without notifying the department.

Then in November 2021 she told them she had started working at Autism Jersey that month, and her first pay date would be 25 November. In actual fact she had been working there since July that year.

"Really bad" at reporting changes

She also said she had moved in with her former partner in October 2022, when she had in fact moved in October the previous year.

And she did not inform the department of a pay rise from Autism Jersey.

All these changes affected her entitlement to Income Support.

When she was interviewed under caution, she stated that she was "really bad" at reporting changes in her circumstances. She admitted that she had received a list of examples of such changes or circumstance, but that she had not read them.

Addressing why she had not told the Department when she had moved in with her partner, she said she had been confused due to being pregnant at the time. 

In a second interview, she said she was unable to remember why she had told the Department she had moved in with her partner on a later date than she had, then later conceded that she had not told the truth.

"An affront to all who pay their contributions”

Advocate Sette called the offences “an affront to all who pay their contributions” and said that “by the finest of margins” he was recommending a non-custodial sentence of 210 hours of community service instead of jail.

Advocate Alexander English, defending, said that at the time of the offences Smith had been “overwhelmed by extremely challenging and upsetting life events”.

He explained that she had had some mental health problems, saying: “It’s part of her condition to be disorganised.”

He added: “The monies weren’t to fund a lavish lifestyle. The prosecution’s conclusions are, we say, too harsh.”

Smith has paid back £3,630 of the total £30,678 overpayment so far but still owes £27,048.

"These are not victimless crimes"

Deputy Bailiff Robert MacRae said: “These are not victimless crimes. All taxpayers are victims of fraud.”

He told Smith: “You should have had no doubt about your duty to inform the department of changes in your circumstances.

“You received significant benefit to which you were not entitled over a long period. The offences are so serious that you could not complain if the court were to impose a prison sentence.”

But he said the Jurats accepted she had no previous convictions, had pleaded guilty at her first appearance in the Magistrate’s Court and was considered at low risk of re-offending, so decided the case was “sufficiently exceptional” for a non-custodial sentence.

Jurats Ronge and Entwistle were sitting.