Scandal in the court: Injustice revealed in the social service fraud!

A current case from Dortmund raises serious doubts about the state judiciary and the handling of social service fraud. The author, who worked as a process observer, describes his shock on the dealings of the court with a fine that was issued on behalf of the Job Center Märkischer Kreis by the main customs office in Dortmund. This matter is particularly explosive, since the main customs office apparently has no proper assignment and responsibility in accordance with Section 64 (2) No. 2b.

The responsible clerk has objected to non -existent administrative offenses within the meaning of Section 63 SGB II. According to experts, the proceedings could apply at the time of the fine on April 12, 2024, after a data comparison by the job center took place on November 21, 2022. According to § 170 paragraph 2 sentence 1 StPO, the pursuit of administrative offenses must be hired if there is a permanent obstacle to persecution. The case was criticized by the presiding judge Sabine Hermanns as the result of sloppy work.

Details of the procedure

The fine also had incorrect information on the citizenship of the accused. During the trial, a woman M. was described as a "protocol helper", which causes the suspicion of falsification of the original protocol. The judge also imposed a fine due to a job, although this is not intended in the law (§ 63 SGB II). Reports indicate that the judge has arbitrarily interpreted an administrative offense during the procedure.

The claim that the person concerned had wrongly received unemployment benefit was refuted by inspection and statements by the accused. Furthermore, the judge cannot distinguish between different types of unemployment benefit. The mandate resignation was also not taken into account in the procedure. The Dortmund District Court decided on this case on November 29, 2024 (file number: 731 OWI 479/24).

In a similar context, it is pointed out that social fraud is a criminal offense that arises from incorrect information or the concealment of important information in social benefits. The examples include concealing ancillary income or incorrect information on the place of residence or family relationships. According to anwalt.de , social fraud is considered fraud as fraud, which can result in criminal consequences, including the repayment wrong Amounts.

The legal consequences of such a fraud can be serious and range from fines to prison terms, depending on the amount of the illegally obtained amount and the frequency of the offense. In addition, those seeking advice are advised to handle their statements carefully if they are reported due to social fraud in order not to burden themselves. An experienced criminal lawyer can work in such cases and request the investigative acts to check possible procedural errors.