Ihenacho/Caudwell Children/Callander Saints and Scroungers

Think about it. What would you do if you had a bad run of luck?

The chances are that you'd end up turning to Government agencies for a bit of help.

We're very lucky to have a welfare state and I think a lot of people don't appreciate it.

My husband is disabled. Without the benefit system, we would have found things very difficult.

Here in the UK, millions of us need to ask for help every year

in the form of benefits, legal aid and healthcare.

But there are some people who are out there to cheat the system out of as much as they can.

Benefit cheats are criminals and they should be treated accordingly.

How are these people managing to get away with this?

But those people who are trying to get rich from the public purse

are now being sniffed out by investigators

who will make sure that as much money as possible is available to those who need it.

This is the world of Saints And Scroungers.

Coming up on today's show...

the scroungers out to play the system.

A woman claiming benefits for years turns out to be a successful landlord

and a big player in the curiously highly paid world of charity work.

A number of awards ceremonies that she's attended here and abroad

in very sort of glamorous outfits...

..A scrounger who wasn't content with a hefty redundancy package

and decided to fleece the system for all she could.

Effectively what she did was continue to receive income-based benefits to which she was not entitled.

And those in legitimate need of support...

a mother who's reluctant to accept help following the birth of her daughter.

I felt like I was letting everyone down, which is a normal feeling.

You do feel guilty, you're thinking, "It's my fault, it's my fault this child's got this condition!"

Losing your job can be devastating.

Very often you've got the same commitments and bills to pay,

but without a wage to cover them.

That's where benefits can come in really handy, to bridge the gap until you get your next break.

But for some people their next career choice is to break the law.

When 56-year-old Clarissa Ihenacho was made redundant in 2005,

she applied to the council for housing and council tax benefit

and to the Department for Work and Pensions for income support as a single person.

She lived in Croydon, the largest of London's boroughs, with a population of over 360,000 people,

43,000 of whom claim benefits.

David Hogan is the investigations manager at Croydon Council.

Hello, David. How are you doing? Welcome.

So, OK...councils don't generally cut off benefits for no particular reason.

What were the concerns with Ihenacho?

We started looking at this case back in 2008

and the trigger for us was contact

from a bailiff, someone who had been round to the Pemdevon Road address in Croydon,

trying to make contact with the occupants.

So what specifically sparked the bailiff's concern?

There was never anybody in at this property.

Nobody ever answered the door to them.

When we first looked at it,

we realised there was a significant arrears of council tax at the property

which is why the bailiffs were involved in the first place.

And we, I suppose, took a different approach.

What did you know about Ihenacho at this point?

Well, on paper she was a single lady who had lost her job and was in receipt of state benefits,

somebody not working.

What she told us about the property was it was that she had the sole use of one room

and that she shared the rest of the accommodation, so things like the bathroom and the kitchen,

and her rent level was ?160 a week.

The fact that she hadn't paid her council tax when she was getting money towards it

was enough to kick-start an investigation,

and the case landed on the desk of fraud investigators at Croydon Council.

Now, due to the nature of her work, this one has asked not to be identified.

As with any new case we make a number of checks.

We look at the council records,

we check who's claiming council-tax benefit,

we check housing benefit, and on this particular case

we checked the Land Registry at Pemdevon Road, and that's where we are now,

to see who owned the property.

Clarissa had claimed that a charity called the Family Education Helpline UK were her landlords.

But the investigators' check with the Land Registry threw up something unexpected.

The owner was in fact a man who shared the same name as Clarissa Ihenacho.

It hasn't been declared on the application form

and also it throws into question the legitimacy of the landlord and tenant relationship.

As the name was the same, there was a suspicion that the owner of the property could be her brother,

husband or even her father,

something that would affect the validity of any benefits claim.

The team got on the case, digging up some credit checks.

There was also a charge on the property with a mortgage

and some matrimonial rights for someone in the name of Ama Ihenacho.

Further investigation showed that Ama was Clarissa's middle name.

They discovered that not only was their single claimant actually married,

but was named on the mortgage of the property with her husband.

Matrimonial rights means that if the proprietor was to sell the property,

then Ama Ihenacho would have some claim to the profits of the sale of the property.

So Clarissa was a property-owner, something she'd omitted to mention on her claim forms.

And so far, in just over three years, she'd claimed over...

..totalling a whopping ?39,000 in overpayment.

So where did the Family Education Helpline UK fit in?

They'd been receiving all Clarissa's housing and council tax benefit

as she'd put them down as being her landlord.

It was ringing alarm bells with the fraud team.

The address she'd given for the charity, Links Road,

fell under Merton Borough Council's jurisdiction,

but working across boroughs is nothing new to experienced fraud investigators like Graham Clark.

Quite often councils will approach each other in an investigation

if an address outside of their borough comes up

and they need to approach that authority

to find out who's registered at the address and whether any benefits are being claimed.

It very much assists us because then we can exchange information and intelligence with that council

and conduct a join investigation.

When we started really looking at that property in Tooting,

we found that it had been divided into two flats,

but had been done so illegally, because Land Registry knew nothing about it.

We also discovered that from one of the flats there was a benefit claim

where the landlord had been identified as a Dr Bell-Gam.

So the property Clarissa claimed was owned by the charity

was in fact owned by a Dr Bell-Gam. Something wasn't adding up.

So you've got a lot of evidence of a potential fraud here.

What do you do next? What we do next is we like to get some answers,

so we call them in for an interview under caution. How did that go?

Well, initially she didn't turn up.

Now, although she didn't turn up, she did make contact later

and she told us that she was ill which was why she couldn't turn up.

The team needed answers from Clarissa.

Will she be able to explain exactly who the housing and council tax benefit has been going to...

..and how is she connected to the charity?

We will see later.

In my mind it shows that it wasn't a bona fide benefit claim,

it was a fictitious claim

where a landlord had been developed for the purposes of claiming housing benefit fraudulently.

So for now it's farewell to the scroungers who are out to beat the system,

and hello to those people determined to help those who need support

but don't know how to ask for it.

Yes, the ones we call saints.

For any couple desperately trying for a baby,

finally getting the news that you're pregnant must be fantastic.

But, sadly, things don't always go to plan,

and nine months of waiting can result in heartache.

Dawn Griffiths is a bus driver and has been together with her husband Geoff for 23 years.

About three or four years ago, Geoff and I had had the day off together,

and Geoff broached the subject of do we want to have children?

His question surprised me, but my answer surprised both of us...

..which was yes.

In 2011, Dawn and Geoff were thrilled to find out that they were pregnant.

Dawn was an older mother and as this was a much-wanted baby, doctors carried out some routine tests

to reassure her that everything was all right.

A week later I got a phone call our local hospital...

You basically had...we were told we had a 1-in-60 chance of Lucy being born with Down's syndrome.

That was a shock.

There was a reasonably high chance of Down's syndrome,

but for Dawn the most important thing was that her baby would survive.

She was offered further tests, but they had their own risks.

To me the risk was too high to lose a child that may or may not have Down's syndrome.

So I just thought, "What will be, will be."

People with Down's syndrome

have 47 chromosomes while the rest of us in the general population

have 46.

People with Down's syndrome will have some kind of learning disability,

some less than others,

and most people with Down's syndrome will have some kind of health condition

at some time in their life.

There will be problems for them in their day-to-day lives...

short-term memory is an issue for people with Down's syndrome,

and learning is much more difficult,

so if you have a baby with Down's syndrome, it will reach its milestones,

he or she will reach the milestones much later than any other child.

Taking this onboard, Dawn and Geoff counted down the days.

And in October 2011, Dawn gave birth to Lucy.

Once you're allowed to hold your child, it's better than winning the Lottery.

The doctors examined Lucy when she was born to assess whether she was healthy.

The paediatrician said, "We think Lucy may have Down's,"

because they go off the facial details,

and apparently there's creases in the hands.

But that wasn't all. Lucy was very ill at birth and the doctors had to take her away.

This worried Dawn and Geoff even more.

Her heart rate was dropping to the point where she had to be resuscitated.

Obviously, it was really traumatic.

I was exhausted there's still bits of Lucy's birth I really can't remember.

But we were that close to losing her.

Lucy's lungs were underdeveloped, she was finding it hard to breathe and she had two holes in her heart.

Thankfully, her condition soon stabilised

and, after a week in hospital, Dawn got some good news.

We were told, "Well, you can take Lucy home now,"

and I just felt fantastic.

You know, it was well worth the wait.

It must be difficult enough coming to terms with your new baby's disability

when there are doctors and nurses around to support you,

but imagine how much more challenging that becomes once you get home and you're on your own.

For most families, it's a huge shock when their child is born with Down's syndrome.

A lot of families will go through a grieving process,

because they literally grieve for the child that they thought they were going to have.

When we got to take Lucy home,

it was frightening. I suppose it is for every parent.

When you're told your child has Down's syndrome

or any form of condition, whatever it is,

it sounds very dramatic, but it is a form of bereavement.

And then not knowing anything about the condition...

..I felt as a mum...

..for all we knew, Lucy was going to be our one and only,

and I felt like I was letting everyone down, which is a normal feeling.

You do feel guilty, you're thinking, "It's my fault, it's my fault this child's got this condition!"

As to adjusting to it, I think you just get on with it.

Cos if you go to pieces, you're no good for yourself and you're certainly no good for your child.

Dawn was facing the normal adjustment period every parent does with a newborn,

sleepless nights and endless nappies.

But Lucy's specific needs threw up some unexpected costs for the new family.

Financially, at the time, we didn't know what the implications were going to be,

because we didn't know the extent of Lucy's needs,

whether or not it was going to be a good while before she could either walk or crawl or talk,

whether or not I would have to stay at home permanently,

which means my husband would have to be the sole provider.

Dawn was happy to give up work if she had to look after Lucy,

but this left them with just Geoff's income to live on,

and, with Lucy's extra needs, the family started to feel the pinch.

The fact that she's going to need hospital appointments far more than other children...

Financially, they were struggling.

But, like many new mums, Dawn was adamant she didn't want any help.

Both me and my husband didn't want to claim for Disability Living Allowance for Lucy,

because we didn't want the outside world to perceive us as scroungers...

I suppose, as any other family would feel, that she's our child, she's our responsibility to provide for.

Although money was a worry, they were happy to be bringing up their daughter.

As she got older, though, the reality of how different Lucy was began to emerge.

All of a sudden, these other children are leaving Lucy behind.

That was hard, cos they were getting up and walking around,

and Lucy hadn't even started crawling then.

The pressure was taking its toll.

Dawn now realised she needed some help.

When I went to my local council, it was Cheshire East, they offered a few other options.

She actually said, "Well, there's a local charity that's based in Staffordshire.

"Do you mind if we refer Lucy to them?

"They deal with children with special needs.

"They might be able to help you in far more ways that we can't."

I said OK and that's how I got to hear about Caudwell.

Caudwell Children's Charity offers practical and emotional support

to families with disabled children.

And Dawn's case landed on the desk of charity worker Julie Dony.

When I first met Dawn and Lucy, I was asked originally just to go out

and meet the family and see if there was any support we could provide.

The family had been offered help, but would it be the type of support that they needed?

We'll find out later.

Now, from those in need of help to those who abuse the system

that we, the British public, pay into year on year.

Losing your job can be tough both financially and emotionally,

but there is a pot of Government money that's there to help out to bridge the gap

until you find your next job.

Unfortunately, there's a tiny minority of people who can't help but help themselves to that money

to which they're not legally entitled.

Linda Callander is a former civil servant who has worked for Warwickshire Court Services

for 24 years as a legal assistant.

As a result of restructuring to the court services in May 2007, Linda lost her job

and she began claiming income support

from the Department for Work and Pensions

and housing benefit from Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council.

Everything seemed above board and there was no reason to doubt her claim.

Income-based benefits

are in payment to people who do not have at their disposal

large amounts of capital,

who, for whatever reason, do not and are not able to work.

But all that changed when the Department for Work and Pensions received some information.

The case with Linda Callander

came to our attention in August 2009

as a result of anonymous information that was received

by the hotline where people give information on suspected benefit-fraud claims.

It was alleged that Miss Callander had had a lump-sum compensation payment from an ex-employer.

The tip-off was passed on to fraud investigator Christopher Hammond who wasted no time.

As a result of the information being received, a fraud investigation file was set up,

and Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council were contacted

to work jointly on the investigation.

Callander now had two authorities on her tail.

But what exactly was she suspected of doing wrong?

All capital assets between ?6,000 and ?16,000 are taken into account,

and payments are deducted from benefit if somebody has capital assets over ?16,000.

Because they are mean-tested benefits, that person is not entitled to receive income support,

jobseeker's allowance, income-based housing benefit or council tax benefit.

This was just an allegation from an anonymous tip-off

saying that she'd had a lump sum from her last employer.

What Christopher needed was hard evidence,

so he got straight on the phone to Callander's previous employers at Warwickshire Court Services.

It was established through the legal gateways that Miss Callander had received a sum of...

..after tax,

and she did not declare this to the Department when she made a claim in May 2007.

It's pretty unbelievable.

The timeline the fraud team had uncovered showed just how brazen she was being.

She had in fact finished work on...

receiving the lump-sum payment on...

and then started claiming income support on...

She was interviewed by a financial assessor at Nuneaton Jobcentre Plus office

whereby she gave information and confirmed that she only had...

..in capital assets,

and she did not declare any of the lump-sum compensation payments.

Over a three-year period, Linda Callander had received

over ?10,000 from the Department for Work and Pensions

and over ?20,000 from Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council.

That's a total of over ?31,000.

In Linda Callander's case, effectively what she did

was continue to receive income-based benefits to which she was not entitled,

thereby taking away the possibility that those benefits could be paid to more vulnerable members of society

who had a genuine need for those benefits.

It was clear to the team at the Department for Work and Pensions and the council

that this ex-legal assistant was pulling a fast one,

and Christopher decided it was time they had a chat.

At the interview, under caution,

Miss Callander said that she had received the money, the lump-sum compensation payment,

and she had then transferred the money into her mother's account two days later on 18 May 2007.

So, two days after making a claim for income support benefit,

Callander moved the compensation payout into her mum's account.

I bet her mum couldn't believe her luck!

She said that her mother had paid for her in times of difficulty

for various holidays abroad and replacing cars,

and she felt that the money that she received from her employer was owed to her mother

and she should be paying it immediately to her.

The authorities weren't having any of it,

and Chris's team issued court proceedings.

There were some delays because the defence did not want the case to be heard in Warwickshire

because of her previous employment,

and the case had to be transferred to different courts in Leicester,

and eventually it was heard in Derby Crown Court in May 2013.

Linda Callander pleaded not guilty to three counts of dishonesty

under the Social Security Administration Act,

and throughout the two-day trial she tried to convince the jury that she was repaying a debt to her mum.

At the end of the trial,

the jury went out for ten minutes

and came back and returned a verdict of guilty.

And the judge said, "Well, Miss Callander, you have heard the outcome of the jury,

"and plainly they did not believe you."

Linda Callander was sentenced to...

She was also given 280 hours of unpaid community service.

The judge remarked that the 280 hours community service

would probably equate to the 30-odd thousand pounds that had been overpaid.

It was a great result,

but the Department for Work and Pensions and Nuneaton and Bedworth Council

also wanted their money back.

They applied for a confiscation order,

and the judge decided that Miss Callander should repay the full amount

that she'd fraudulently claimed...

..and, if she didn't within six months,

she'd be sent to prison for up to 18 months.

Was that enough of an incentive for her to grab her chequebook?

Miss Callander has fully repaid in excess of ?30,000

to the Department for Work and Pensions and to Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council.

It was the second good result for the investigation teams.

It demonstrates that we will not tolerate cases where somebody has claimed benefits

to which they are not entitled.

And when the overpayment trickled through to the Department for Work and Pensions,

they knew exactly how to spend it.

Money that is recovered can be redirected back into investigations

so that we can continue our fight against benefit fraud.

Linda Callander had a hefty redundancy package of almost ?60,000,

and she could be enjoying the rewards.

Instead, because of her greed and dishonesty,

she's now doing 280 hours of unpaid work.

OK, now it's time to leave the deceitful world of fakes and frauds,

and return to those who truly need the welfare system that the state provides.

In 2011, Dawn Griffiths gave birth to her daughter Lucy.

She had Down's syndrome and needed extra care,

but Dawn just loved being a mum and gave up work as a bus driver to become Lucy's full-time carer.

Coping well, she initially refused to seek help or claim benefits.

The first year, to me, felt tough.

As she got older, the gap was becoming more and more pronounced.

She had her own way of getting round, but she couldn't interact with them the same as other children could.

So that was hard. Emotionally, I felt I was letting her down.

Dawn was coping as well as she could but, in reality, she was exhausted.

Finally, she reached out to her council who put her in touch with a children's charity.

We provide practical and emotional support

for disabled children and their families.

This can be through

a variety of ways, through family services, for example,

where we can help families access those things that they really, desperately need.

When a family does have a disabled child, it's not always obvious what help is out there for them.

They come from a position of really being thrown in at the deep end.

Dawn's was referred to one of the charity's support workers Julie Dony.

When I first met Dawn and Lucy,

the referral came from the children's centre.

I was asked originally just to go out and meet the family

and see if there was any support we could provide.

She actually came round and wanted to know what was Lucy's situation.

She met Lucy.

And it was more of a case of, "Well, this is what Caudwell do,

"this is what, as a charity, we can offer you.

"Have you thought about sensory equipment? Have you thought about Disability Living Allowance?"

It can be quite difficult to understand how someone can work hard

to provide for themselves and their families all their lives and pay their taxes,

but, when the time comes when they need support and need to claim benefits,

it just doesn't feel right.

They don't see themselves as benefit claimants.

It must have been a huge wake-up call for Dawn

when she realised that Lucy's condition was so serious

that not only was she eligible for help, but she needed it.

Lucy was not claiming DLA at that point,

and so one of the first things we did was we applied for DLA.

Part of the problem with DLA is they're very lengthy forms,

and parents struggle to fill them in.

Dawn had been very reluctant to claim Disability Living Allowance,

feeling that as a mother it was her role to meet Lucy's every need.

But after much soul-searching with her husband,

they realised it really could help.

Now we're in the mindset, it's Lucy's money and not ours.

It pays for treats, it pays for days out that ordinarily we wouldn't do.

With the financial assistance in the form of Disability Living Allowance now coming into the household,

on one side at least things were getting easier.

The DLA helps with things that perhaps you don't think about.

Fuel to take Lucy...for the car to take Lucy to hospital.

Parking at the hospital. For parking, it's ?3 each time.

Which doesn't sound an awful lot, but if you've got to go every six weeks, it soon adds up.

Lucy might need specialist equipment.

Days out that perhaps mainly we might not have been able to afford otherwise,

treats for Lucy, guilt-free treats.

You're kind of thinking that, you know, in the future Lucy might want something

where, at the time, if we didn't have the Disability Living Allowance,

it might put financial strain on us.

But if we didn't have the Disability Living Allowance, I think we would struggle.

So with some of the money worries being dealt with, what about Lucy's development?

Dawn had her parents on hand to help her,

but she wanted to give her daughter every bit of help she could to grow.

Sensory equipment helps with children's development.

The fish tank. The lights change colour. It's got the bubbles so it's quite relaxing.

It's pretty and with the lights as well, it improves the hand-eye coordination,

their concentration, and it gives pleasure as well.

Dawn had been taking Lucy to sensory rooms in her area with great results,

but they could only get to them every now and then.

Money was a bit of an issue,

so we just felt it would be really nice for Lucy to have the equipment at home,

because she was responding so well to it.

It wasn't easy, it took us six months of constant e-mails...

But it was worth the effort.

Julie succeeded in getting Dawn and Lucy the funding needed

so that Lucy could have the sensory equipment at home.

When it came and...

..we showed it to Lucy, her reaction was, like, amazing.

It was...it was like a fairy story, to be honest, just watching her...

open up...in ways we'd never seen her do before. I just feel very emotional now...

..mainly for her... Sorry.

It's really nice for Lucy to be able to have easy access to the equipment in her own home,

and she can use it as much or as little as she wants to.

But it helps her... I mean, it's helped her hand-eye coordination so much.

Lucy was doing well, but Dawn and Geoff were exhausted.

I know it's a horrible thing to say... I really needed a break.

The charity helped the family access a fund to enable them to have a little bit of time together.

The holiday was fantastic.

It was nice to...

You find you get in the habit of routine.

And then it's, well, Lucy's got to go down for a sleep, she's got to have her dinner,

nappy changes...

..what am I going to give Lucy for her dinner?

It's just nice to think about me and my husband,

rather than having Lucy being the focus all the time.

And that's what I find...still find difficult is making time for me.

Julie's helped Dawn and the family both financially and emotionally,

and the difference to all their lives has been overwhelming.

Lucy's now able to communicate and interact with her family better,

her physical movement has improved and her personality is starting to shine through.

La-la-la! There you go!

If I could say something to Julie, I don't think words could actually just say how grateful we are...

I mean, I know it sounds silly, but I can't put it in words how grateful we are...

..because whether she knows she's doing it or not...

I suspect she doesn't realise, she's...

The only thing I could say would be, like, if she went now, it would be like losing a leg.

That's how I feel.

Slightly wrong analogy, I know, but it's the only way I can describe in words how fantastic Julie's been.

CLAPPING

Dawn knows that she can call me if she needs any further support

and, you know, I'm always on the end of a phone.

Most people with Down's syndrome will go to ordinary school,

will learn to read and write,

be able to have some kind of supported living environment

and go out to work,

and people with Down's syndrome get married now

and lead full and rewarding lives.

I hope Lucy goes from strength to strength.

I would like Lucy to have an independent life,

and live a full independent life...

..and do whatever Lucy wants to do.

And I'm sure she will reach her full potential.

Lucy's condition means that her life will never be straightforward.

However, at least Dawn and the family now know that they have got people they can rely on

who'll be there with them every step of the way.

And that means that as a family they can plan together for the future...

which is as much as any parent can hope for.

Time now to leave our saints and return to the greedy world of our scroungers.

Clarissa Ihenacho had been claiming benefits on the basis that she was single.

She'd told the council her landlord was a charity in Tooting,

but it turned out the property was actually owned by her own husband.

So around ?27,000 worth of benefits had been wrongly going

to the charity's address whose landlord was down as one Dr Bell-Gam.

We got in touch with Merton Council

which is the council for Tooting.

They provided some information to us, for example, electoral-roll information,

and information about who was the council-tax payer.

They said that Clarissa Ihenacho was the registered council-tax payer at the address,

and also had given a care-of address as Pemdevon Road.

In my mind it shows that it wasn't a bona fide benefit claim,

it was a fictitious claim

where a landlord had been developed for the purposes of claiming housing benefit fraudulently.

The plot thickened.

Clarissa was paying council tax at the address she'd originally claimed was her landlord's,

the Family Education Helpline headquarters.

But the investigation had shown that the owner was a Dr Bell-Gam.

When I looked at the Land Registry for Links Road, it showed that it was purchased in 1986

by Bell-Gam Clarissa Ama Ihenacho.

Caudwell Ihenacho has clearly used a number of her names in different orders

to claim different things.

For example, bank accounts, mortgage applications...

she does change her name around.

OK...so not only does Clarissa have rights to one property,

she owns the property in Links Road.

Oh, and I think she's a doctor.

The team wanted answers.

Clarissa claimed to be too ill to attend an interview under caution, so they went to her.

When we drove to Pemdevon Road, this road that we're in now,

we knocked on the front door,

we introduced ourselves,

and we were let into the property at this stage.

Her son was actually present at the address at the time,

and we have to use recording equipment

to take note of the questions that we ask in the interview.

And there was some concern about using electricity at her property, etc,

and it became very difficult to conduct the interview at that particular time,

and we decided that it was not suitable to do a home interview at that stage.

Clarissa Ihenacho became quite distressed

and angry at our presence in her property,

so we decided not to conduct the interview and left the area.

Clarissa wasn't going to play ball,

and because she wasn't telling the council anything, they dug deeper

and found out that she herself had set up the charity.

I did some additional research on the internet,

putting in all combinations of her name,

and it brought up quite a bit of information regarding charity work that she's been doing,

a number of awards ceremonies that she's attended here and abroad in very sort of glamorous outfits...

In addition to that, there was an article in the Nigerian Guardian about Clarissa Ihenacho

where she described herself as an educationalist in this country,

a family lady with a husband and children,

and actually stating that she was...held a PhD...

..very different circumstances.

So she's actually the founder of the charity

that she was calling her landlord in the fraudulent benefit claim?

Yes. And officers looked at the photos

and they realised that this was the same woman that they'd seen

when they visited her about the housing benefit claim.

OK. So she obviously wasn't who she claimed she was. What else did you discover?

Well, we discovered that she had a mortgage on the Links Road address.

Now, if you remember, this was the address that she said her landlord lived at.

And the doctorate? Any truth in that?

Well, we're not sure. We did investigate this, but, to be honest, it was inconclusive,

and we feel that she probably did some academic training before she left to come here to the UK,

but we don't know that she ever qualified.

On the initial application form for housing benefit, her property at Tooting wasn't declared,

and also the fact that she had matrimonial rights in Pemdevon Road wasn't declared.

In addition, we would say that the landlord was completely fabricated.

A tenancy agreement was provided as support of the application

as to her liability to pay rent at that address,

and we say that there was never any liability to pay rent,

because she was renting from herself,

because she was one of the founder members of the Family Education Helpline UK.

Although Clarissa owned one of the properties with her husband,

he wasn't the one making the claims.

So it was only Clarissa against whom the investigators had any evidence.

They took her to court, but she wasn't going down without a fight.

During the trial she was in complete denial that she was actually being prosecuted

and that she'd actually done anything wrong.

She believed that there was nothing she had done, this was unjust

and she shouldn't be tried.

It was a waste of the taxpayers' money and time.

In court she gave a number of documents to the judge and the jury

stating that she was involved in charity work here and abroad,

and monies that she'd obtained here was actually used to fund an orphanage,

the Arrows Of God Orphanage,

and that without that money they would not be able to survive

and this would have an effect on the children in the orphanage.

From the information that we'd obtained during the investigation,

we could see no transfers of money abroad to charities.

It looked like all the money had been used to pay for her mortgages both on Pemdevon and Links Road.

Clarissa pleaded not guilty on eight counts of fraud,

including dishonestly making false statements and furnishing false documentation.

But the jury didn't believe a word she said and convicted her on all eight counts.

The judge sentenced her to a one-year custodial sentence.

When the sentence was given,

she reacted very badly, with disbelief, there was quite a lot of noise in the court,

the family were all present as well and they were upset as well.

It was...it was a very...

..heated situation, er, at that point.

But it wasn't just a conviction the team was after.

They wanted to ensure that Clarissa paid all the money back and more under the Proceeds Of Crime Act.

Enter Zoe Neale, financial investigator at Croydon Council.

After conviction, we inform the court we wish to proceed to confiscation.

In certain cases, the council is within its rights to ask not just for the money that's been overpaid,

but also to confiscate any assets that they have

which were gained as a result of their criminal behaviour.

What I do is I compile a list of her assets, I look for evidence of any property,

I look for evidence of her lifestyle,

I look for evidence of anything which could show that she had something

which she could use to satisfy a confiscation order.

She has not just gained financially

from the housing benefit overpayment

or from the benefit fraud,

she has also gained because she has had rental income.

So I investigated about the houses, I've been through her bank accounts,

I'm looking for unexplained cash amounts,

I'm looking for unexplained income...

I found that she had shares, PEPs, ISAs, she has a car...

It turns out that Clarissa had been living a lifestyle most of us would envy.

And it was all from the proceeds of taxpayers' money.

It turns out, in fact, she was worth a fair whack.

I believe that she's profited from her crime by about...

However, I also have to work out how much I think she has in available assets.

And that would include how much is in her bank accounts, how much is her property,

how much is her car, and I believe that's about...

Having pocketed ?39,000 she shouldn't have,

over three years her profits were almost 16 times that much.

Zoe and her team are now on their tail.

She can't get rid of her assets because I have frozen her 15 bank accounts and the two properties,

so she cannot dissipate her assets.

What happens is we don't stop, we don't give up, this does not go away....

our solicitors will still be writing to the court to say, "We need to get this resolved."

And then, basically, our solicitors and the courts and the defendant are trying to get a court date sorted,

but we will eventually get a court date and we will eventually come to some agreement.

It's looking like there's no way out for Clarissa.

Charity begins at home, eh?

Well, Clarissa Ihenacho certainly thought so,

except she believed that the Government was the charity and she was the worthy cause.

She denied it right up to the bitter end.

But that doesn't change the fact that she'll now be making a sizeable donation back to the public purse.

Subtitles by Red Bee Media Ltd