Benefit cheat took an extra £6,000 (From The Wiltshire Gazette and Herald)

Benefit cheat took an extra £6,000

8:17am Friday 23rd March 2007 in Swindon By Gazette Reporter

Dole cheat Vikki Barrett kept claiming income support despite getting back together with her husband.

And when that reconciliation failed, the 35-year-old continued to take money she wasn't entitled to when she set up home with one of his friends, a court heard.

In total the mother-of-two took nearly £6,000 she wasn't entitled to during two periods over almost three years.

Ian Halliday, prosecuting, told Swindon Crown Court that Barrett came to Swindon from Harrow in north London to live with her parents when she split with her husband Paul Barrett.

In December 2001, he said, she started making what was then a lawful claim for income support as a single parent.

But her husband followed her to Swindon and rented a house in Grange Park and in the following March they attempted a reconciliation.

"He was working and maintained the family by work. He eventually bought a property in Swindon as well," he said.

But he said the reconciliation broke down in March 2003 and Barrett moved back in with her parents.

That summer, he said, Mark Gumm, a mutual friend of her and her husband's, also moved to Swindon, staying at her parent's house.

Barrett and Mr Gumm then started to see each other and they later began cohabiting in August 2004. He too was working and Mr Halliday said the deception came to an end in November 2004, when the couple made a joint claim for family tax credit.

In total, he said, she pocketed £5,867 she wasn't entitled to.

Barrett, of Winlaw Close, Shaw, admitted two counts of failing to notify a change in circumstances.

Mr Halliday said the first count related to her not notifying the authorities of the reconciliation and the second when she started a relationship with a friend of her ex-husband.

Allan Roberts, defending, said the first offence covered just over a year and the second just under three months.

The first offence took place because she was unsure as to how the reconciliation would go, he said, and the second was terminated by her.

He said the money she got was not used on luxuries but simply on maintaining the family.

Passing sentence, Recorder Ignatius Hughes said: "Failing to notify the relative authorities of your change of circumstances has led to a considerable loss to the public purse.

"These are serious offences and offences which might well have led to you being imprisoned."

Instead, he imposed a 200-hour community service order and told her to pay £250 costs.

The overpayment will be reclaimed independently by the Department of Work and Pensions.