268 cases of fraud cost Wolverhampton City Council £1m
A housing benefits assessor fraudulently taking £32,000 was just one of the 268 cases of fraud detected by Wolverhampton council in one year, a report reveals.
Staff misusing a council purchase card and working on out-of-work activities during their contracted hours were just some of the other cases, which totalled more than £1m.
The report, which followed a meeting of the audit and risk committee, details how the total value of the detected cases of fraud was £1,067,168 in 2014/15.
The report followed a meeting of the audit and risk committee, details how the total value of the detected cases of fraud was £1,067,168 in 2014/15.
There were ten cases of internal fraud reported, six more than neighbouring authorities, valued at £36,500.
Councillor Craig Collingswood, the chair of the council's audit and risk committee, said: "These cases ranged from the misuse of a council purchase card, theft of cash and property, working on non-work related activities during works time and in the most prolific case, a council housing benefits assessor arranged fraudulent payments totalling £32,000 for themselves. Subsequent investigations have resulted in a number of employees leaving the council, including through dismissal. In two cases, the suspects were arrested by the police and the council successfully prosecuted them through the courts, with the housing benefits assessor receiving a 20 month prison sentence suspended for two years."
Since January 2015 there have also been £579 worth of council tax to electoral register fraud, an 100 per cent rise on last year. This means that a great number of people though registered on the electoral roll, have not been paying council tax.
The data, drawn from council submissions for an annual fraud and corruption survey show how many cases of fraud have been reported in councils across the UK.
Only 59 per cent of councils in England submitted data for the report.
Wolverhampton has a low number of fraud cases in comparison to other councils in the East of England, East Midlands and West Midlands, which have reported £355 cases on average each.
However, the total value of these acts of fraud is lower than Wolverhampton, at a mere £764,835 on average.
Wolverhampton had a total of 64 cases of tenancy fraud, with the same number of properties recovered. This was significantly higher than the average of nearby councils that only detected 40 cases of this type of fraud.
It had one case of right to buy fraud, which cost them £26,000. It only had one case of disabled parking fraud.
The council tax fraud detected by the council was a result of data from the Cabinet Office, received in December 2015. This data matched those on the electoral register to those listed as council tax payers. There were 2,554 matches. An investigation is currently underway by the government's National Fraud Initiative to determine who is and is not eligible for a council tax discount.
The fraud report advises councils to ask the question - 'Does my council's counter fraud resource have the skill set to tackle the wide and varied range of non-benefit frauds?'
It also aims at supporting councillors in detecting fraud, focussing on national fraud risks and reviewing their strategy and performance.
Wolverhampton council has been invited to participate in a Fraud Data Warehouse initiative with Birmingham City Council to share data in relation to different types of fraud, including council tax fraud. The council have also been working in partnership with Sandwell council since September 2015 to carry out investigations.
Funding has been received for the council to launch an anti-fraud app for use by the public to report potential instances of fraud. This should be available to download soon from the Apple app store.
Councillor Collingswood said: "I work closely with our internal audit and counter fraud team in ensuring that thorough investigations are undertaken, and that appropriate action is taken against the perpetrators. We also continue to focus on the need for the Council to ensure that strong preventative measures are in place, in order to reduce the potential for fraud in the first place".
"The Audit and Risk Committee plays a key role in ensuring that the Council has a strong anti-fraud culture in place, and we receive regular updates on all fraud investigations, and wider counter-fraud initiatives."




