Date:   6 August 2007

MIDDLE CLASS CRIMES

The vast majority of the middle class would never contemplate the commission of a burglary or taking part in a riot in the early hours in the morning. However, according to the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies at King’s College London, it is the middle class which commits the ‘crimes of everyday life’.

Nearly two-thirds of consumers regularly commit a range of offences against business, government and their employers according to a new report by the Centre. The report is based on a survey of 1,807 people in England and Wales aged between 25 and 65. Research by Professor Susanne Karstedt and Dr Stephen Farrall of Keele University found that:

• a third (34%) paid cash in hand to avoid taxation

•  just under a third (32%) kept money when ‘over-changed'

• around one in five (18%) had taken something from work

• one in ten (11%) avoided paying their TV licence

• one in ten (11%) wrongly used identity cards for their own gain

• just under one in ten (8%) did not disclose faulty goods in second hand sales

• 7% padded or falsely inflated an insurance claim

• 6% asked a friend in bureaucracy to ‘bend the rules'

• 5% claimed for refunds to which they knew they weren't entitled

Although the middle classes are contributing to this type of behaviour, research has found that eight out of ten (82 per cent) felt that they had been victims of crimes or shady practices such as being sold poor quality pre-packed food, having items added to bills, being sold holiday packages that did not deliver and being cheated in second-hand sales. 

Although 32% of people admitted to keeping excess change, it is also worth considering how many people count the change that they receive, and what they would do when they realised that they have been given excess change. They could be a few miles away by then; would one go back and return the change? Probably not!

With regard to insurance claims, 7% admitted to inflating their insurance claim. How many householders will claim for materials that have been damaged by the recent flooding or shall we ask how many will use the flooding to their advantage and claim for possessions or materials which do not even exist?

These may seem to be small crimes but they amount to a considerable sum. In the report it states that the Department for Work and Pensions estimates that 3% of benefit, pension and allowance claims were fraudulent (interview with SF, 26 February 2002) totalling £573 million or 4 per cent of social security payments. Also the Association of British Insurers claim that 4 per cent of household insurance claims made were fraudulent.

People question whether these are truly crimes, but is it not theft to take a piece of equipment from a work place? Section 1 of the Theft Act 1968 states “a person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it”. 

Some people may try to excuse their behaviour by calling it “victimless” or “faceless” crime. However we all end up bearing the cost in increased taxes, insurance premiums and the economic impact on business.

The report concludes that: ‘the law-abiding majority’ which politicians like to address, is a chimera. The law-abiding majority not only do not abide the law, they also do not believe in the value of laws and rules shrugging them off in pursuit of their interests and desires. They even regard law-abidingness as a disadvantage.’

Food for thought?

Kirandeep Gakhal