A COUNCILLOR and his wife defrauded taxpayers of nearly £10,000 over a seven-month period, a jury heard.
Graham Sinclair, 56, and his wife Deborah de la Nougerede Sinclair, 50, both of Hatch Lane, Chingford, claimed housing benefits, council tax benefits and income support which they may not have been entitled to, Southwark Crown Court heard.
Mrs Sinclair had submitted a claim for income support in May 2005 and the Sinclairs also successfully applied for housing and council tax benefits in February 2006.
Both claims were legitimate as the Sinclairs’ only income was a carer’s allowance and child tax credit.
But in May 2006, Mr Sinclair was elected as a councillor for Chingford Green ward and began receiving a monthly allowance of £559.74.
He would then have been bound by law to tell the authorities of this new income.
Both original claim forms notified the Sinclairs of their duty to tell the authorities of any changes in circumstances, said Kevin Dent, prosecuting.
Speaking to the jury, Mr Dent said: “If he was not aware before, Mr Sinclair would have become aware of the rules after he became a councillor.
“If he was unsure what the rules were and had been acting in an honest way, you may want to consider why he didn’t ask someone.
“If he had asked someone, the answer would have been that you have to declare allowances.”
The Sinclairs were also sent two leaflets from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), telling them that changes in income must be declared, Mr Dent said.
Mr Sinclair also received the councillors’ rulebook when he was elected, explaining that allowances may affect entitlement to benefit.
Mr Dent added: “In fact, neither Mr nor Mrs Sinclair notified the DWP or Waltham Forest council about the fact that Mr Sinclair was receiving members’ allowance in addition to state benefits.”
A benefits officer visited the Sinclairs’ home in October 2006 for a routine check and Mrs Sinclair filled in a form answering questions about the family’s circumstances, the jury heard.
Mr Dent said: “At no time during that meeting did Mrs Sinclair mention that her husband had now been elected as a councillor and was receiving an income.
“Was there a good reason why Mrs Sinclair was not mentioning the fact that household income had increased or was Mrs Sinclair acting dishonestly to give a false impression that the family’s circumstances had not changed?”
An investigation was launched after Mr Sinclair sent an email to a council officer asking why a Mrs de la Nougerede’s housing benefit entitlement had been reduced.
The email also referred to change of circumstance of “somebody” within the household but did not mention that Mrs de la Nougerede was actually his wife or that he was one of the recipients of benefits.
Mr Dent said: “It is clear that Mr Sinclair knew full well the importance of declaring any changes to the household income.”
Mr Sinclair is charged with dishonestly failing to notify the borough of Waltham Forest of a change in circumstances which he knew would affect his entitlement to income support, housing benefit and council tax benefit.
His wife is charged with making dishonest representations on a benefit claim form.
The trial continues.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel