A woman who claimed benefits as a single parent for more than a year-and-a-half was living with a working partner throughout that period, a court heard.

Elisha Myers received an overpayment of £23,349 in Universal Credit due to her failure to declare she was living in a “common household”, between December 2021 and July 2023.

Durham Crown Court was told the 27-year-old defendant, who has no previous convictions, made the initial claim on December 9, 2021, stating that she was a single parent, having split from her partner on December 4 that year.

But Mr Dryden said during that period she was in a relationship with a man, living at an address in Ferryhill, subsequently moving to a different property in the town, in September 2022.

Mr Dryden said following inquiries, including checks of bank records, with utility companies and of council tax status, “it became obvious they were in a common household.”

(Image: Andrzej Rostek) When interviewed, Myers made admissions that she was in a relationship, but she told investigators that she made the Universal Credit claim as her partner would not give her any of his wages.

In a prosecution brought by the Crown Prosecution Service Central Fraud Group, Myers, of Rydal Road, Ferryhill, admitted fraudulently failing to disclose information to make a gain for herself.

Charlie Thompson, representing the defendant, said he could not disagree that the fraudulent claim went on for “a significant period”, in excess of 18 months.

“There was no abuse of power or trust, and it was not particularly sophisticated offending.

“An application was made, but it was out of desperation that it was made, and then she has not corrected the situation.

“She made the original fraudulent claim and never corrected it afterwards.

“She wishes that she had dealt with it sooner and faced it, ‘head-on’.

“There was talk of changing address and when she did, the second address was supposed to be notified to the DWP (Department for Work and Pensions) in February, but she didn’t do so until July.

“She knew she had done wrong but was too frightened of the consequences and that was the wrong decision to make because it extended the period over which she was doing wrong.”

Mr Thompson told the court Myers' partner, who worked unsociable hours, contributed to none of the household bills and he would often be absent from home from a Friday to a Monday.

“As she organised the finances, she felt she had to do something.

“She should have discussed it with her partner and urged him to either contribute or leave and then she could have validly claimed as a single person.”

(Image: The Northern Echo) Mr Thompson said in the report prepared for the court by the Probation Service there was a reference to a lack of understanding of how the DWP is funded.

“She says now the impact her offending has had has hit home and she originally didn’t think it would come this far.

“She now has to face the music and own up, which is what she has done.”

Mr Thompson added that the money fraudulently claimed did not contribute to any “lavish lifestyle”.

Judge Nathan Adams said he accepted the money went to pay for household expenses for the defendant and her three children.

See more court stories from The Northern Echo by clicking here

Get more content including the stories that matter to your community from The Northern Echo, by clicking here

“Nevertheless, it reached a total of £23,000 which you dishonestly claimed and to which you were not entitled.”

Taking into account that it was her first offence and that she pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity, Judge Adams passed a 24-month community sentence during which Myers must carry out 120 hours’ unpaid work.

Although the judge put in place proceeds of crime proceedings, he said he accepted it was unlikely to find any funding to “claw back” from the defendant.