What was said to have started as a joke, snowballed into a woman allegedly defrauding the government of more than Lm20,000 over the last three years by creating numerous fictitious families in need of children’s allowance and directing the money into her own bank accounts, a police inspector said in court yesterday.

Prosecuting inspector Ian Abdilla took the stand in the case against Maria Victoria Attard, a 32-year-old from Cospicua who is accused of defrauding the government and misappropriating funds entrusted to her. With her power as a clerk at the Social Security Services, Ms Attard is said to have created a number of fictitious families in need of social welfare and directed the money issued by the government into bank accounts under her name, reaching a total amount of over Lm20,000 between March 2002 and May 2005.

At yesterday’s sitting, inspector Abdilla explained that during the investigation, police detected 19 families that were either fake or who did not qualify for children’s allowance. A total of 76 payments were made to these 19 families, amounting to a total amount of Lm20,606, he said. All the money either went to three bank accounts in the accused’s name or was issued in cheques and addressed to her house or those of her relatives.

The inspector gave a breakdown of where the money was sent. Twenty-five payments, amounting to Lm6,527, went into a BOV account while another 22, totalling Lm6,122, went into a different account at the same bank. Lm6,205, made up of 24 payments, was directed into an HSBC account, while Lm1,725 was issued in five cheques that were all cashed by the accused.

Ms Attard had another HSBC account into which she used to direct payments and suspicions were raised when she mistakenly directed a payment into this account after it had been closed.

Inspector Abdilla told the court how something did not seem right when the hard copy of a particular family’s file could not be located following the return of a cheque marked as being sent to an untraceable address.

When the direct payment issued by the accused did not go through, because the bank account had been closed, the money was sent back to the department. A cheque was then issued and sent to the address of the family that was supposed to receive the money. Since the family’s name and the address were fictitious, the cheque was returned to the department. The inspector explained that officials then went to check the family’s telephone number on the physical file and when the hard copy was not found, they became suspicious.

Upon detailed observation of the computer logs, inspector Abdilla explained that the police initially identified 13 families which appeared to be suspicious, a number which then rose to 19. He said that most of these were fictitious, apart from around two or three that were real families that did not qualify for children’s allowance.

The inspector went on to explain that as the police were at the Malta Information Technology and Training Services (Mitts) investigating their suspicions on 11 May this year, they noticed that a 20th family was being created at that precise moment.

At 11.26am the Wellington family was inputted into the social security system, a family with four children that qualified for children’s allowance, said the inspector, noting that this data was inputted into the system by the accused. The identity card numbers attributed to the parents of this family were found to belong to two Italian nationals, one living in Malta and the other in Gozo.

Later in the day, payment details were inputted, this time from a user-name belonging to a woman named Dorianne Marlow. The day after, on 12 May, the same payment was authorised by yet another user of the system, Isabelle Vassallo, and the family’s details were also later deleted from the system.

Inspector Abdilla said arrest warrants were then issued and Ms Marlow and Ms Attard were called in for questioning. Ms Marlow denied any involvement and said she had been out shopping when the Wellington family had been inputted in the system from her user-name. This information was confirmed when Ms Marlow was seen on the close circuit television at the Next shop in Valletta at the time the data was inputted.

The woman also laughed out loud when she read the names of the fictitious Wellington children. “That day, a colleague of ours had a baby and one of the names of the children is this child’s name,” she said. Ms Marlow went on to explain they had launched into a conversation on favourite names and the other three fictitious names matched those she herself had mentioned that day.

The inspector said that, as she was called in for questioning, Ms Attard immediately said: “I know what you are going to talk to me about and I want to tell you that I am the only one involved.” She went on to admit she had not only used her own user-name on the social security system, but also those of her colleagues, to authorise payments made to the fictitious families. She said she used other people’s computers when they left their desks to input information and authorise payments.

When the inspector quoted the amount she had defrauded, Ms Attard was visibly upset. She said she had not kept count of how many families she had created and the amount of money she had directed into her own bank accounts. The woman said the whole thing started with a joke made in her office suggesting someone create a child to get money.

The accused said she first used to take note of how much money she was taking, but would feel guilty and throw everything away. When she felt she needed more money, she would once again begin to create families.

In court yesterday, the inspector presented three large boxes and one smaller one containing items seized from Ms Attard, items she had bought with the money she had defrauded. These included a 45-piece set of crystal glasses, a Swarovski crystal vase, a statue and a decanter, a Lm1,000 Omega watch and earrings, a pendant, a cross and rings she believed were diamonds, continued inspector Abdilla.

At the end of the sitting, presiding magistrate Saviour Demicoli ruled sufficient prima facie evidence had been presented for a bill of indictment to be drawn up against the accused. Dr Ludvic Caruana appeared for Ms Attard.