Benefits 'cheats' should not be sent to prison
BENEFIT cheats who fleece the taxpayer for up to £20,000 should be let off jail – according to new official proposals.
The fraudsters, along with conmen who prey on the elderly, should get a community sentence instead, says a Government-backed body.
The suggestions, sent to Britain’s most senior judge, Lord Phillips the Lord Chief Justice, were attacked last night as
giving the go-ahead to crooks.
Blair Gibbs, campaign director of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: “The Government admits there is a big problem with benefit fraud and yet liberal judges have decided to make this crime of stealing from the taxpayer even easier.”
And Shadow Justice Secretary Nick Herbert added: “Judges’ discretion to jail con men should not be fettered, especially if the real reason is because the Government won’t provide adequate prison capacity.”
The proposals were made by the Sentencing Advisory Panel to the Sentencing Guidelines Council, chaired by Lord Phillips, which in turn advises the courts.
The proposals, set out in a special paper, cover a range of fraud and deception offences, such as those connected with benefits, VAT, and obtaining credit.
It revealed there were 199,778 offences of fraud and forgery recorded in the last year – but that generally only eight per cent of fraud offences reported to police lead to a conviction.
And it added at least £700million a year is lost in benefit fraud with a further £40million stolen through tax credit fraud.
The paper suggests frauds of less than £5,000 should normally be dealt with by a fine or a community order, while crooks who scam up to £20,000 could be given a community penalty, although a court could jail them for up to 12 months.
Under separate proposals, the SAP said conmen who target the vulnerable could also escape prison.
A crook who cons an elderly resident in to handing over high-value goods of sentimental value could
be given no more than a community order, although the court would have the power to hand out jail sentences of up to 18 months. Conmen who do target the vulnerable and do not get high- value goods would not even face prison and could be given no more than a fine.
But Mr Herbert added: “Crimes of dishonesty where the most vulnerable are preyed upon should be treated seriously by the courts.”
Roy Rudham, chairman of the National Neighbourhood Watch Association, said: “These are vulnerable people and the trauma that come with it can be absolutelyhorrendous.
“In worst-case scenarios the person actually dies shortly afterwards because of the upset and trauma caused.
“We need to come down very, very hard on these people who target the elderly, who should be living their lives in peace and security.”
Would a good beating deter these fraudsters? Should we bring back corporal punishment? Comment NOW on Have Your say.
