No. 2 IN HOW CAN THEY?

This candidate appears to be one sharp operator, who knows how to play the system to their best advantage, certainly the evidence we have seen proves this.

The first application for Incapacity Benefit goes back about 10 years, and once again the "illness" is depression.

This all changes in around 2001 when it is alleged that the candidate has a heart condition, we have seen evidence that would suggest that the candidate had surgery for this and to all intents and purposes should have made a full recovery.

How can we say this, well we have had a chat with a friend who happens to be a Surgeon, who carries out the operation that was needed on a daily basis.

Obviously making a full recovery one would have thought would allow the candidate to live a normal life, but, it seems that would mean a loss of benefits.

So an application was made for Disability Living Allowance, and todate we have been informed the candidate is still in receipt of that.

Now we are NOT questioning whether this candidate should or should not be in receipt of DLA.

What we are questioning is the reasons they allegedly put down to claim it IE. they cannot walk more than 50 yards, their partner has to dress them, they cannot cross roads on their own because they get dizzy, they have to have a full time carer 24/7 and the reasons go on and on.

Now if the physical condition of the candidate were to be as bad as they claim, how then can they function as a councillor?

But of course many who have related this to us know full well that the claim is false.

But its not the only fraudulent claim this candidate has made, the others have far more criminal implications which we will come to in due course.

North Street cannot say they were not advised or warned to check out the background of their proposed candidates. But pigeons start coming home to roost when you start putting the photos of individuals on leaflets that then go across the whole of the borough.