A SCHEMING former town hall worker fiddled benefit claims even though he had £750,000 in the bank.
Benefit staff became suspicious of Christopher Barcroft when they discovered he was pocketing large sums of interest from undeclared accounts, and now he's been jailed.
Barcroft, 44, swindled £32,518 in housing and council tax benefit over 10 years.
He submitted a renewal form each year, detailing his place of work, income and the fact that he had only one current account containing `a few hundred pounds'.
The former lesiure manager for Tameside council was jailed for three months at Manchester Crown Court.
His assets will be subject to a confiscation hearing early next year, following a High Court application by the council.
Deputy council leader Joe Kitchen said: "I sincerely hope this prison sentence acts as a suitable deterrent to anyone else who's thinking of abusing the benefits system in this way."
Barcroft, of Huddersfield Road, Stalybridge, pleaded guilty to one count of theft, two of deception and 10 of making false representations.
A further 28 similar offences were taken into consideration.
Barcroft worked for Remploy in Wythenshawe from 2000 until earlier this year.
The company is government owned and provides employment for disabled people.
When interviewed, Barcroft said he did not declare his bank accounts because he was concerned there would be a security risk.
A female relative of Barcroft said: "Chris wishes this matter to be kept private.
"But he has consistently provided his National Insurance number, so any relevant details about his assets could have been identified while making any assessment regarding his applications. These were never questioned.
"Perhaps had this question been raised, this matter could have been concluded much sooner.
"When passing sentence, the judge commented about his references of good character."
Tweet

Showing comments 1 to 25 and replies | View All
ace, manchester (14/07/2008 at 10:35)
joaquin wonov, manchester (14/07/2008 at 10:38)
jomov, Manchester (14/07/2008 at 10:56)
Ha! Maybe if he hadn't made the claims in the first place - seeing that he didn't need to...!
Maybe we should all put in claims for benefits we don't qualify for on the off chance they may make a mistake.
Guten Tag (14/07/2008 at 11:04)
Grief Tourist, Tameside (14/07/2008 at 11:13)
vera angry (14/07/2008 at 11:50)
Fraudsters confidence is based on the inability of the benefit department to spot unsophisticated bogus claims.
Councillor Allheart, in a black cab (14/07/2008 at 11:51)
DOOBYDO (14/07/2008 at 11:51)
mancmanomyst, Wythenshawe (14/07/2008 at 12:11)
We only have limited prison space and prison is expensive. Why should we pay more to accomodate him at Her Majesty's pleasure?
A financial crime requires a financial punishment. He should have had all his assets taken off him and be banned from claiming benefits - the state would have made a profit and it really would send out a clear message.
Jail wont help anyone
ace, manchester (14/07/2008 at 12:23)
How true your words are! its time for a really big clampdown on these cheats that make it hard for the people who really need help.
Big Ernst (Manchester, Where Else??) (14/07/2008 at 12:25)
vera angry (14/07/2008 at 12:29)
It would be rather nice to see cheating on this scale be rewarded with a complete confiscation of all assets, so the fraudster has to start from scratch as most honest working class do. But of course this would never happen, his fat bank account will be waiting for him when he gets out, just hope he receives "justice" from inside.
Hamish Macbeth, Whitefield (14/07/2008 at 12:30)
Rugbygirl, Urmston (14/07/2008 at 12:35)
Guten Tag (14/07/2008 at 12:53)
Mr Manchester (14/07/2008 at 12:55)
Oops.
Peter (14/07/2008 at 12:56)
Mike (14/07/2008 at 13:21)
Melandra (14/07/2008 at 13:52)
Pandora (14/07/2008 at 14:22)
kız (14/07/2008 at 14:30)
annon (14/07/2008 at 15:07)
The whole system is a farce.
dessie, manchester (14/07/2008 at 15:25)
dessie, manchester (14/07/2008 at 15:28)
Odysseus, Stockport (14/07/2008 at 15:52)
He should be treated the same as if he went into a shop and stole £32,000 out of the till. Also what sort of person steels £32,000 when he had 25 times that amount in the bank?
He should be charged with the full costs of the investigation and subsequent trial as well. Why should we pay?