EMPLOYMENT FUND FRAUDS

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLIII, Issue 20782, 17 July 1937, Page 8

EMPLOYMENT FUND FRAUDS

DEPARTMENT SHOULD PROSECUTE MAGISTRATE’S VIEWS By Telegraph—Press Association AUCKLAND, July 16. The view that it was the duty of the Labour Department to prosecute in every case where it was satisfied that a man on sustenance had deliberately made a false declaration to obtain benefit to which he was not entitled under the Employment Promotion Fund was expressed by Mr C. R. Orr Walker, S.M., in the Police Court when a further ten offenders were fined. "There are many cases throughout New Zealand where hardships have been involved where the Department has made arrangements with the offenders to repay sums dishonestly obtained without taking them to Court,” said Mr A. T. Grandison, district employment officer of the Department, when prosecuting Joseph Fletcher Nicoll on a charge of making a false statement. “Investigations sometimes disclose special circumstances which warrant some leniency being extended to the offender, and this on; is such a case.” He said that illness in defendant’s family had aggravated the hardships of living on relief pay, and doubtless had increased the temptation for defendant to augment his income by making a false declaration. The circumstances caused the Department to defer Court action and give the offender an opportunity of refunding by reasonable instalments, but only two payments were made. "The Department considers that if it were now denied power to exercise the right of processes previously withheld, it would be forced to refuse consideration in many cases similar to this where severe hardship would warrant deferring legal action,” Mr Grandison added. “The Department should not differentiate Just because it thinks a man’s domestic affairs are hard,” said the Magistrate. “In matters such as that before the Court, a virtual theft is involved, and offenders should be prosecuted. The Court should be allowed to decide the matter of penalty.” Nicoll was fined £5 and costs 10 MAXIMUM PENALTY A VICIOUS RACKET By Telegraph —Press Association WELLINGTON, July 16. Describing frauds on the Unemployment Fund at the present time as nothing less than a racket, a vicious racket, Mr Luxford, S.M., sentenced Laurence Petersen, labourer, to six months’ hard labour on two charges of obtaining £1 by false pretences, and convicted and discharged him on two other charges. This is the maximum punishment, the Magistrate having power to make the terms of imprisonment of three months cumulative on two charges only. It is understood that this is the first occasion in New Zealand on which a penalty of this noture has been imposed. Mr Luxford expressed the hope that the Department would employ the provisions of the Criminal Act in future.

HEAVY FINE IMPOSED “VERY DELIBERATE CASE” By Telegraph--P-ess Association AUCKLAND, July 16. A fine of £lOO and costs was imposed by Mr C. R. Orr Walker in the Police Court to-day, when Joseph Hood was charged with making a false statement under the Employment Promotion Act.

A Department of Labour official said Hood registered in 1931, as a married man. In June last year he and the woman he had been living with went to England, and on his return he immediately registered for relief again, describing himself as married. At no time did Hood disclose what amount of money was held by the woman with whom he lived, the official stated, adding that he received £lOO/3/- in excess of what he was entitled to. Counsel for Hood said he was previously a ship’s steward, but had been unable to obtain employment for six years.

“It seems to be a very deliberate case,” said the Magistrate in imposing the fine.