Rugby star's Worcester Park mum sentenced after spending years trying to get out of fraud convictions

Lynne Hampson

Lynne Hampson

First published in News
Last updated
Surrey Comet: Photograph of the Author by , Chief Reporter

A fraudster who conned Sutton taxpayers out of more than £60,000 has been prosecuted after spending years trying to wriggle out of being punished.

Worcester Park woman Lynne Hampson, whose son Sam Hampson is a professional rugby player, was found guilty of falsely claiming income support and council tax benefit while earning thousands of pounds each month by renting out rooms in her seven-bedroom Langley Avenue property four years ago.

Surrey Comet:

Hampson's rugby-playing son Sam

But she has spent time since then trying to get out of being punished while legal experts unravelled the false identities she tried to use to make her fraudulent claims.

Now she has finally been punished after a judge at Croydon Crown Court last week sentenced her to 28 days in prison suspended for a year.

Sutton Council’s strategic director Gerald Almeroth said: "Fraudulently claiming taxpayers money is a very serious matter.

"Our investigation team has worked hard to uncover the full extent of Ms Hampson’s deception. It has been a drawn out process because she was using multiple aliases to cover her tracks.

"We will continue to ensure that our borough maintains its reputation for fairness.

"It is important that we catch people who are cheating the system and picking the pockets of law-abiding taxpayers in the process."

Over the course of five years Hampson told the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) she received just £20 a week for rooms in her house - despite it having a swimming pool in the back garden.

This allowed her to claim substantial amounts in benefits.

Surrey Comet:

Surrey Comet:

The Langley Avenue house - complete with swimming pool 

In the end she was caught after an angry tenant contacted the DWP in 2007. An investigation revealed she earned as much as £540 per month for her rooms. 

She pleaded guilty to two counts of fraud in 2009 but it has taken four years to finally sentence her after she twice tried to withdraw her guilty pleas.

He son is a professional rugby star and has played for both Wasps and London Irish. He is now an ambassador for nutrition firm Protein World.

He had nothing to do with the fraud.

Comments (5)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:03pm Tue 15 Apr 14

ewell says...

Wow she must be totally devastated with that sentence or more like laughing her way to the bank. What a joke!
Wow she must be totally devastated with that sentence or more like laughing her way to the bank. What a joke! ewell
  • Score: 12

12:36pm Wed 16 Apr 14

kingstonpaul says...

28 days at Her Maj's Pleasure is still a much sterner punishment than Maria Miller received for defrauding taxpayers.
28 days at Her Maj's Pleasure is still a much sterner punishment than Maria Miller received for defrauding taxpayers. kingstonpaul
  • Score: 14

3:56pm Wed 16 Apr 14

Red_Rock says...

She's not going to prison - it's a suspended sentence dumbo.
She's not going to prison - it's a suspended sentence dumbo. Red_Rock
  • Score: 0

7:54pm Wed 16 Apr 14

D Hoole says...

Was this the house that always put out lots of extra rubbish on bin day?
Was this the house that always put out lots of extra rubbish on bin day? D Hoole
  • Score: 0

9:32am Thu 17 Apr 14

DB says...

So Gerald Almeroth feels it is 'important' that these people are caught, but why is it important if they are then going to be let off with a warning?

This women has been caught in the act and no punishment has been given. There is no disincentive to other people doing the same thingit. There is only a small chance they will be caught, and even if they are they will be let off.

The courts are actually encouraging this type of behaviour. There is no mention of her having to pay back the money, but I assume this was the case?
So Gerald Almeroth feels it is 'important' that these people are caught, but why is it important if they are then going to be let off with a warning? This women has been caught in the act and no punishment has been given. There is no disincentive to other people doing the same thingit. There is only a small chance they will be caught, and even if they are they will be let off. The courts are actually encouraging this type of behaviour. There is no mention of her having to pay back the money, but I assume this was the case? DB
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree