PAUL TANDY LONGTON BENEFIT CHEAT AND SEX OFFENDER SENTENCED IN STOKE-ON-TRENT

In August 2014, Paul Tandy, a resident of Longton, found himself at the center of a serious legal case involving benefit fraud and prior sexual offenses. Tandy, aged 59, had been claiming more than £17,000 in disability benefits from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) under false pretenses, all while actively working as a bus driver. His case was brought to light during a court hearing at Stoke-on-Trent Crown Court, revealing a pattern of dishonesty that spanned several years.

According to court records, Tandy initially began receiving disability living allowance after suffering a significant injury. The injury occurred when he was struck by a lorry while working as a milkman, which left him with mobility issues. At that time, his claims appeared legitimate, and he was entitled to the benefits he received. However, the situation changed as his condition improved, and evidence emerged that he was no longer as disabled as he claimed.

The prosecution, led by Philip Bradley, pointed out that Tandy’s continued receipt of benefits was unjustified once his mobility improved. Court evidence showed that he was seen on multiple occasions walking much better than he had previously described, raising suspicions about the accuracy of his claims. Despite this, Tandy failed to notify the DWP of his improved condition, which is a legal requirement for benefit recipients. His dishonesty was uncovered when authorities received information indicating he was working as a bus driver, contradicting his disability claims.

It was also revealed that Tandy had been dishonest about his mobility for a period spanning from late 2008 to November 2012, during which he claimed nearly £17,500 in disability benefits he was not entitled to receive. His previous address was listed as Wolstern Road, Longton.

Tandy pleaded guilty to the charge of dishonestly failing to inform the authorities about his improved mobility. His defense, represented by Paul Cliff, argued that Tandy had been in full-time employment since leaving school and had suffered a serious injury below his knee when a milk float was struck by a heavy goods vehicle. Mr. Cliff explained that by 2008, Tandy had learned to manage his pain and mobility had increased, which made his continued claims dishonest, though he was not living a lavish lifestyle on benefits.

In addition to his benefit fraud, Tandy was already serving a four-year prison sentence for sexual offenses committed against a child, a conviction he received in June of the same year. The court decided to impose an additional 18-week jail term for the benefit fraud, to run consecutively to his existing sentence. Judge David Fletcher addressed Tandy directly, stating, “You are 59 and your life has come crashing down around you. You are now serving a four-year sentence. That is the first involvement with the criminal justice system you have had. Your claims were not fraudulent from the outset but were over a significant period of time and you defrauded £17,000.”

Overall, the case highlights issues of benefit fraud and the importance of honesty in social security claims, especially when combined with serious prior convictions. Tandy’s case serves as a reminder of the consequences faced by those who attempt to exploit the welfare system while engaged in other illegal activities.