Courier avoids jail for welfare fraud

boardsuser1

Courier who was working for the courts service of Ireland while claiming disability allowance avoids jail for stealing €76,000

Man who stole €76,000 in welfare payments while running a successful courier business avoids jail
http://jrnl.ie/3640050

coylemj

Even if he was sentenced to two years in jail, the likelihood is that he would have been out in a matter of weeks as an alternative to giving early release to someone serving time for a serious assault or burglary. There is a finite number of places in the prisons so people guilty of non-violent crimes don't have much to fear from the system.

It also explains why there is an estimated 15% non-compliance when it comes to TV licences and why so many people in the city centre throw their rubbish around the corner instead of paying a bin company to take it away. Worst case: they spend a few hours sitting in a reception room in Mountjoy and then get sent home.

nuac

Mod
NOTED. Legal issues?

Claw Hammer

He hasn't avoided prison. He got a suspended sentence which is conditional on paying back all of the money. He will not have escaped jail until all of the money has been paid back. If he goes to jail there will be no more money paid back and the state will incur the cost of maintaining someone in prison who is not likely to re-offend and is not a threat. A reasonable exercise of discretion by the judge in my opinion.

boardsuser1

Claw Hammer wrote: »

He hasn't avoided prison. He got a suspended sentence which is conditional on paying back all of the money. He will not have escaped jail until all of the money has been paid back. If he goes to jail there will be no more money paid back and the state will incur the cost of maintaining someone in prison who is not likely to re-offend and is not a threat. A reasonable exercise of discretion by the judge in my opinion.

What is of interest is only for a former employee trying to sign on he was effectively away with it.

I doubt he'll appeal the sentence, it does however expose other weaknesses in the irish legal framework.

If a man can set up a very profitable business and not make contributions and claim welfare then what does that say.

I'm surprised the judge in the case didn't impose a partial custodial sentence with the balance suspended.

The welfare will chase him for the money, the question being if he doesn't sign on anymore will they ever see it.

The tax payer is down about €100,000 between the money,investigations,court etc.

Claw Hammer

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

What is of interest is only for a former employee trying to sign on he was effectively away with it.

I doubt he'll appeal the sentence, it does however expose other weaknesses in the irish legal framework.

If a man can set up a very profitable business and not make contributions and claim welfare then what does that say.

Fraud detection the the Department of social protection is very poor.

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

I'm surprised the judge in the case didn't impose a partial custodial sentence with the balance suspended.

The judge didn't because some money had been paid back with the promise of more to come. If he went into custody the money would stop.

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

The welfare will chase him for the money, the question being if he doesn't sign on anymore will they ever see it.

The tax payer is down about €100,000 between the money,investigations,court etc.

He has already paying some back and the suspension of the sentence is on the basis that he pays all the rest back. The taxpayer does better the way it has been done.

Del2005

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

The tax payer is down about €100,000 between the money,investigations,court etc.

If they send him to jail then the taxpayer would be down a lot more. Isn't €90k or more to keep a person in prison for a year? Better off getting the money back eventually than sticking him in jail

hullaballoo

What you have raised are mostly points of political concern rather than legal interest/issues.

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

What is of interest is only for a former employee trying to sign on he was effectively away with it.

I doubt he'll appeal the sentence, it does however expose other weaknesses in the irish legal framework.

If a man can set up a very profitable business and not make contributions and claim welfare then what does that say.

The DSP should take steps to ensure it isn't making payments to people who are not entitled to them - political issue.

The checks and balances in place are clearly not enough - policitcal issue.

I'm surprised the judge in the case didn't impose a partial custodial sentence with the balance suspended.

As above, what point does imprisonment serve here? More costs? Instead, he's given an opportunity to partially re-pay the state (and the taxpayer) for what he stole.

The welfare will chase him for the money, the question being if he doesn't sign on anymore will they ever see it.

The tax payer is down about €100,000 between the money,investigations,court etc.

Again, is it better, more practical, preferable for society for him to re-pay 75% of that guestimate or pass the book over to the already overcrowded and woefully under-resourced prison service?

boardsuser1

Del2005 wrote: »

If they send him to jail then the taxpayer would be down a lot more. Isn't €90k or more to keep a person in prison for a year? Better off getting the money back eventually than sticking him in jail

Poor garlic man got an awfully rough deal then

boardsuser1

hullaballoo wrote: »

What you have raised are mostly points of political concern rather than legal interest/issues.


The DSP should take steps to ensure it isn't making payments to people who are not entitled to them - political issue.

The checks and balances in place are clearly not enough - policitcal issue.



As above, what point does imprisonment serve here? More costs? Instead, he's given an opportunity to partially re-pay the state (and the taxpayer) for what he stole.



Again, is it better, more practical, preferable for society for him to re-pay 75% of that guestimate or pass the book over to the already overcrowded and woefully under-resourced prison service?

Feel free to move it if you think it is better suited to the political forum?

hullaballoo

Del2005 wrote: »

If they send him to jail then the taxpayer would be down a lot more. Isn't €90k or more to keep a person in prison for a year? Better off getting the money back eventually than sticking him in jail

Yes, it's about that per annum per inmate but the reality is also that someone sentenced to 2 years is unlikely to even serve half of that.

boardsuser1

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Fraud detection the the Department of social protection is very poor.

The judge didn't because some money had been paid back with the promise of more to come. If he went into custody the money would stop.


He has already paying some back and the suspension of the sentence is on the basis that he pays all the rest back. The taxpayer does better the way it has been done.

Valid points.

hullaballoo

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

Feel free to move it if you think it is better suited to the political forum?

I'm interested to know what you think the legal issues are?

I am not saying this isn't a thread for Legal Discussion. Just that so far, there's been very little legal discussion.

boardsuser1

hullaballoo wrote: »

I'm interested to know what you think the legal issues are?

I am not saying this isn't a thread for Legal Discussion. Just that so far, there's been very little legal discussion.

I felt it was best placed here as it was before the courts and involved fraud.

twowheelsonly

coylemj wrote: »

Even if he was sentenced to two years in jail, the likelihood is that he would have been out in a matter of weeks as an alternative to giving early release to someone serving time for a serious assault or burglary. There is a finite number of places in the prisons so people guilty of non-violent crimes don't have much to fear from the system.

It also explains why there is an estimated 15% non-compliance when it comes to TV licences and why so many people in the city centre throw their rubbish around the corner instead of paying a bin company to take it away. Worst case: they spend a few hours sitting in a reception room in Mountjoy and then get sent home.

Not true I'm afraid. Only people that get straight out these days are those in on fines and that should be coming to a halt as well over the next 12-18 months or so.

hullaballoo wrote: »

Yes, it's about that per annum per inmate but the reality is also that someone sentenced to 2 years is unlikely to even serve half of that.

Also not true. 2 years with remission is 18 months. Most prisoners these days are doing the vast majority of that. Those that are released early are usually on a Community work scheme of some sort. If they don't comply with that then they're locked back up again. Very few get any sort of 'free' TR these days.

seagull

Given that it came to light due to his not paying an employee's PRSI, he can also expect a visit from revenue.

boardsuser1

seagull wrote: »

Given that it came to light due to his not paying an employee's PRSI, he can also expect a visit from revenue.

Another day in court for that.

And they’ll have no problem shutting him down.

BorneTobyWilde

No longer works and can't claim welfare. How is he paying it back exactly.

Claw Hammer

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

No longer works and can't claim welfare. How is he paying it back exactly.

At the rate of €400 a month.

boardsuser1

Claw Hammer wrote: »

At the rate of €400 a month.

Where is the money coming from though?

I know if i wasn't working or on welfare i'd have nothing.

He must have a substantial reserve of money if that's the case from a business sale or something.

coylemj

Del2005 wrote: »

If they send him to jail then the taxpayer would be down a lot more. Isn't €90k or more to keep a person in prison for a year? Better off getting the money back eventually than sticking him in jail

Not that old chestnut again :rolleyes:

The fixed and variable costs of running the prison service divided by the number of prisoners probably comes to 90K per annum per prisoner.

That does not mean that if they release one prisoner, the tax payer is better off to the tune of 90K p.a., nor does each additional prisoner cost us 90k p.a. The incremental cost of one extra prisoner is probably closer to 15k p.a.

pilly

Epic fail at stirring up outrage there OP.

boardsuser1

Another case of welfare fraud involving a 72 year old pensioner and over €200,000 getting a suspended sentence.

http://jrnl.ie/3643797

Surely if she was 20/30 years younger she’d have gotten jail.

Having paid back just over €1000, the department will face a huge write off of the debt.

dxhound2005

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

Poor garlic man got an awfully rough deal then

Garlic Man got away very lightly compared to this other SW cheat from around the same time.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0721/304028-murrayp/

They both set out with equal deliberation over an extended period to defraud the taxpayer. From memory Garlic Man got away with €1.6 million before being caught. SW Man only got away with €248,000 but his sentence was twice as long.

boardsuser1

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Garlic Man got away very lightly compared to this other SW cheat from around the same time.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0721/304028-murrayp/

They both set out with equal deliberation over an extended period to defraud the taxpayer. From memory Garlic Man got away with €1.6 million before being caught. SW Man only got away with €248,000 but his sentence was twice as long.

Now that’s a proper sentence for fraud.

blackwhite

Del2005 wrote: »

If they send him to jail then the taxpayer would be down a lot more. Isn't €90k or more to keep a person in prison for a year? Better off getting the money back eventually than sticking him in jail

The €90k is a red herring.

It’s a simplistic number based on taking the total costs of the prison service, divided by the average number of prisoners.

It ignores that the vast majority of the total costs are fixed costs, that adding a new prisoner won’t actually increase.

The true incremental costs of a new prisoner isn’t publicly available AFAIK, but it’s likely to be considerably less than €90k pa

Goat the dote

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

Poor garlic man got an awfully rough deal then

Is he out yet?

boardsuser1

Goat the dote wrote: »

Is he out yet?

According to this he’s out well over 4 years

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/retail-and-services/firm-of-garlic-man-paul-begley-making-almost-4-000-a-week-in-profit-1.1622427?mode=amp