UNEMPLOYMENT FUND

Manawatu Standard, Volume LVIII, Issue 40, 15 January 1938, Page 11

UNEMPLOYMENT FUND

CASE AT WELLINGTON. SUBSTANTIAL FINE. Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, Jan. 14. Described as obviously well educated, Charles Watson, an elderly man, was charged before Mr J. H. Luxford, S.M., in the Magistrate’s Court, Wellington, to-day, with obtaining benefit under tho Employment Promotion Act, 1936, by means of false statements as to his age, assets and weekly income. “This is certainly a most glaring case of suppression,” said the inspector who prosecuted. “The offences are deliberate and "they cover a long period.” Defendant was convicted and fined £35. He was allowed 14 days in which to pay. Mr E. A. Selman, district employment officer, said defendant originally registered as unemployed early in 1931 and had been on relief continuously since that date. His last periodical declaration on form E.P. 32 was furnished on May 7, 1937, when he gave his age as 55 and stated that his assets were nil. Similar declarations had been made at regular intervals back to 1931, and ill every instance he had described his assets as nil and under-stated his age by at least 10 years. Mr Selman said that, when taxed with making false declarations, defendant admitted under stating his age and failing to disclose his assets, giving as his reason that, when he first sought relief work, he was afraid that, if he disclosed the true position, he would be refused relief, and once having started to mislead the department lie felt that he had to continue doing so. He now claimed to he 75 years of age, but there was reason to believe his age was nearer 65. That had been ascertained from the Pensions Department in connection with his application for an old-age pension, which had been granted recently. His various statements as to his assets and income since the discoi'ery of the offences had not been altogether satisfactory, and it had been necessary to enlist the help of the police to secure reliable evidence.