A benefits cheat who swindled taxpayers out of £30,000 could be jailed as a sheriff said there are few punishment options available.
Marie van den Berg kept an inheritance windfall secret from the Department for Work and Pensions, while she continued to claim Employment and Support Allowance.
Her lawyer told Perth Sheriff Court that “rather perversely” she was also put over the prescribed capital limit after receiving £11,000 in back payments from the DWP.
The 57-year-old, from Alyth, was told sentencing options are limited and she could face jail.
But it was argued there were “exceptional circumstances” surrounding her case and she had the money ready to repay.
Not entitled to payments
The court heard that while living in Strathmore View between 2018 and 2021, unemployed van den Berg knowingly failed to give prompt notification to DWP of a change in her circumstances.
She knew failing to declare having capital over the prescribed limit would impact how much income-related Employment and Support Allowance she received.
By failing to let the government department know, she obtained £20,341.75 to which she was not entitled.
Between 2019 and 2021, van den Berg further admitted failing to alert Perth and Kinross Council of having capital in excess of the prescribed limit.
She knew this would affect her entitlement to housing benefit and gained £10,435.75 without entitlement.
Personal problems
Solicitor Mike Tavendale, defending, said his client had suffered “a number of difficulties” in recent years.
He said she had been caring for her husband who died following a long-term illness.
“She has also had to cope with the problematic behaviour of her son, who has been on a long-term deferred sentence at this court.
“She is a genuine first offender and has pled guilty at the first opportunity.”
Mr Tavendale said: “It is clear that, given the amounts concerned, Mrs Van Den Berg’s liberty is very much at dispute.”
But he said there were “exceptional circumstances” that could keep his client out of jail, given she was ready to repay the outstanding amount in full.
“I have known Mrs Van Den Berg for the best part of five years and I am aware of the strains that have been put on her, not least from her own physical difficulties.
“She has had surgeries on two occasions and neither have been particularly successful.
“In fact, she had another fall just a few weeks ago.”
‘Perverse’ payments
Mr Tavendale said: “It seems somewhat perversely that the reason why some of these arrears had accrued is because she received back money from the DWP.
“Given there was over £11,000 in back payments, one does wonder whether that might have raised a concern that that would have put her over the limit and triggered some form of investigation.
“Had that happened, I suspect we wouldn’t be where we are today.”
The court heard Van Den Berg had also received an inheritance from her late father.
“She had it in her mind that that didn’t count,” Mr Tavendale said.
“That’s not right, but that’s the perception she had and from looking at her bank statements, it’s clear that she didn’t spend much money at all.
“She physically didn’t need this money.
“It was only when her benefits were suspended that she needed to spend the money to support herself.”
Earlier this year, she received £90,000 from the sale of the old family home.
Missing puzzle piece
Sheriff Jennifer Bain KC said: “What concerns me in this case is that there don’t seem to be alternatives to custody available to me.
“A fine would be the easy option, because the money is already available.”
She said a restriction of liberty order, given Van Den Berg’s health, would not be much of a punishment.
“I know she has not been in work for a number of years but I do wonder if there is some kind of unpaid work available for her.”
The sheriff deferred until February 14 and called for a supplementary report to look at all options.
“There is one piece of the puzzle missing before I can reach a conclusion,” she said.
For more local court content visit our dedicated page or join us on Facebook.
