Man is found guilty of £10,000 benefits fraud

A man has been found guilty of receiving £10,236.25 in Disability Living Allowance (DLA) payments, despite walking more than 10,000 steps in his job as a hospital porter.

Michael MacLeod, 62, was found guilty last Friday, February 28, of knowingly failing to tell of a change in circumstances that would affect his DLA.

Fort William Sheriff Court heard that between October 2014 and March 2018, MacLeod – who had pleaded not guilty – received £10,236.25 in DLA payments to which he was not entitled due to an undeclared improvement in his condition. MacLeod, of 7 McAndie Court, Glenlochy Road, Fort William, suffered an injury to his foot in a motorbike accident which led to surgery and a bolt being put in his ankle, which made walking difficult and caused pain.

The court heard that in 2006, in an application for DLA, MacLeod said he could only walk eight yards before he had to stop, that he fell up to three times every day, would not be able to walk seven days a week, used crutches indoors and needed assistance going up and down stairs.

Details of two jobs were revealed to the court which demonstrated MacLeod was able to move around much more than previously thought.

From October 2014, MacLeod worked on the Boyd Bros haulage site in Corpach for just over a year, where he was mainly driving a loading vehicle but had to walk 300 metres to get to the vehicle.

From May 2016 to the present, MacLeod had worked as a hospital porter, walking more than 10,000 steps in every shift and managing to occasionally walk 500 metres to work. The court heard MacLeod – who still takes painkillers – was able to work and walk much further thanks to an ankle brace he bought using DLA money.

Procurator fiscal depute Niall

Macdonald said: ‘During his evidence, [MacLeod] was, at some stages, underplaying his ability to walk, saying he could only go 100 yards, contradicting his own acceptance that he walked much more than this while at Boyd Brothers.

‘The number of steps carried out in hospital would be considerably more than that which is indicated. Overall, there was reluctant acceptance that his capabilities were much in contrast to his declared abilities, contrary to his denial today.’

Defending MacLeod, solicitor Stephen Kennedy said: ‘There was no evidence that any information was sent to Mr MacLeod after his initial award of DLA saying he must promptly inform of a change. The question then arises, how is it shown he knew he had to report if a change did exist, to a prescribed person, and what severity of the change?’

Sheriff Eilidh MacDonald said: ‘The evidence of those working with you during the period of the libel and by your own evidence today most of these limitations were not present in your daily life during the time libelled.

‘That was a change. You knew you were getting a higher rate of DLA. You knew that if your ability improved, you would have to tell DWP, you said so at interview. You knew there was a change and you would benefit because of it. You did not report the change. If you had, you would have been reassessed at that time. You were getting a motability car from 2006 because it had been assessed that you were virtually unable to walk. You knew that situation changed and you didn’t report it.’

Sentence has been deferred until March 24 to allow the court to establish if the accused has paid any of the money back.