Amanda Webber – Benefit Fraudster

On 23rd May 2013 Amanda Webber, a mother of eight, was found guilty of multiple counts of benefit fraud. It was different, and far more serious, than most of the cases that a Court will see in this category of offences.

Ms Webber claimed that five of her children had disabilities or medical conditions that impacted on their lives, and claimed various benefits (Disability Living Allowance, Housing Benefit, Council Tax Benefit, Carers Allowance and tax credits) as a result. There was a lengthy trial – five weeks – where the jury heard evidence that the children were leading “active lives, taking part in PE and activities including music, drama and dance. Some even auditioned for ITV’s Britain’s Got Talent show“.

The total value of the fraud was £353,000 over an eight year period.

When dealing with benefit fraud, it is common for there to be a Pre-Sentence Report, but in this case the Judge has adjourned the sentencing for tomorrow (which won’t be enough time to do a report). This is probably because it is so serious that he will send her to prison.

So. What will she get? The starting point is the Fraud Sentencing Guidelines (page 25). We know the value – this puts it in the second column. It seems pretty likely that it is fraudulent from the outset, planned and carried out over a long period of time.

There was a trial, so there is no credit for a plea of guilty. Her being sent to prison will have a devastating impact on her children, but this will provide little mitigation. My guess? 3½ years. We’ll find out soon enough, but what do you think she’ll get? And, perhaps more interestingly, what should she get?


Edit – Ms Webber was sentenced on 24th May 2013 to 4 years imprisonment. Further coverage is here.

This entry was posted in In the news on by .

About Dan Bunting

I'm a lawyer who works for myself. Legal geek, maths freak, general dullard and jack of all trades. Here’s a few views on law and occasional musings on life. Usual caveats about not relying on anything I say etc applies.

5 thoughts on “Amanda Webber – Benefit Fraudster

  1. Andrew

    Has to be custody, children notwithstanding. And long enough to mean it. But if I were the judge I would try to find a way to keep it down to, say, 33 months.

  2. Z

    Hey, in cases such as this, what if the children are actually disabled but they weren’t able to prove it? What happens then.
    Also in this particular case did all the children come on to the stand and testify or get tested or anything?
    Im sorry but i’m a bit of a layman here just want some more knowledge about cases as this.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s