£30,000 tax cheat is given ‘final chance’ by judge
A £30,000 tax cheat who breached a suspended prison sentence order has been given a final chance by a judge.
James Tunaley, of Lowergate Road Huncoat, was given a nine-month suspended jail sentence in March 2017 after making false claims on his self assessment returns between 2013 and 2015 in order to collect tax rebates.
The self-employed bricklayer and builder pleaded guilty at Burnley Crown Court to 10 counts of fraud by false representation by submitting income tax returns which he knew or believed to be false.
He was also required to complete 100 hours unpaid work as part of the suspended sentence, however prosecutors said Tunaley had only completed 13 hours by the beginning of January because of depression.
The 29-year-old was hauled back to Burnley Crown Court for breaching his suspended sentence order after failing to attend two probation service appointments in September and October 2017.
The court heard that although Tunaley had a valid medical reason not to attend the appointments, he failed to provide a doctor’s note to the probation service within the required five day limit.
Philip Holden, defending, told the court: “The defendant has provided a number of sick notes relating to his depression to the probation service.
“His position is he tried to get an appointment with his doctor.
“He was unable to get one until October 3, by which time the five days had lapsed. He has shown me a series of WhatsApp messages to the probation service in which the notes are provided.
“One of which covers the period that is referred to. It was provided to them but it was provided to them late. He’s going back to work now after eight or nine months of doing very little work because of depression.
“He would welcome the opportunity if your honour was minded to complete the order.”
The court heard how Tunaley has been awarded a ‘fairly long’ contract in the Ribble Valley to assist in building homes.
Judge Beverley Lunt adjourned sentencing Tunaley for the breach of order to February 23 ‘to see how many hours he has done, to see if he is working and to decide what to do and whether to order costs.’
She told the defendant: “If your health is good enough to work then your health is good enough to do those hours.”