A 22-year-old woman who falsely claimed over £16,000 in Universal Credit by lying about her children living with her has been sentenced to a community order instead of jail.
Kayley Evans, from Solihull, first made the fraudulent claim at age 18, despite her children never living with her as they had been placed into care.
How the Fraud Was Committed
At Birmingham Magistrates’ Court on March 6, Evans admitted to making a false statement to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to obtain benefits.
- She falsely claimed that she was a single, unemployed mother with two children living with her.
- She even notified the DWP to add a second child to her Universal Credit claim.
- In reality, her first child was placed into care weeks after birth, while the second was taken into care immediately.
Prosecutor Nabiha Ahmed confirmed that Evans had no previous convictions but had knowingly misled the DWP to increase her benefit payments.
“Neither child has ever lived with Miss Evans. She understood this would impact on her benefits claim.”
Court Proceedings and Defense Arguments
The court heard that Evans had not been assessed for mental health treatment, but her defense lawyer, Alexandra Youster, requested that the sentencing proceed without delay.
Key Points from the Defense
- Evans had a troubled past, having just left the care system when she committed the fraud at age 18.
- She was influenced by bad people and was unwell at the time.
- Since then, she has turned her life around, securing her own flat, holding down sporadic jobs, and starting a university course.
- The fraud was described as an act of naivety rather than deliberate criminal intent.
“She had just turned 18 and left the care system. There’s a lot of background and trauma in this lady’s life. She was around very bad people and was unwell at the time.” – Alexandra Youster, Defense Lawyer
The Sentence: Community Order Instead of Jail
Given the length of time the fraud occurred and the £16,000 overpayment, District Judge Michelle Smith considered a suspended sentence. However, after reviewing Evans’ circumstances, she opted for a community-based rehabilitation order instead.
Sentencing Details
- Two-year community order
- 20-day rehabilitation activity requirement
- £114 victim surcharge (but no prosecution costs due to financial hardship)
- Recovery of the £16,000 fraudulent benefits separately
Judge’s Rationale
“I can step back from a custodial sentence. Given your age, circumstances, and the trauma you have suffered, I believe rehabilitation will prevent further offending.” – District Judge Michelle Smith
This case highlights how financial fraud within the benefits system is taken seriously but also considers individual circumstances and rehabilitation needs. While Evans escaped jail, she must comply with her community order and repay the fraudulently obtained funds.
With her new job and university course, she now has the opportunity to rebuild her life legally and responsibly.
