Trial opens over alleged fraud involving five government jobs
Prosecutors say a man concealed overlapping public-sector roles and used sick leave to manage the workload.
.jpg){kind=link}
A trial has opened at Southwark Crown Court after prosecutors alleged that a man held five full-time government jobs simultaneously. Kashim C. denies nine counts of fraud, and no verdict has been reached.
The prosecution case is that C. moved between overlapping roles across councils, government departments and public bodies while concealing his existing employment. Jurors were told that he was contracted to work 183 hours a week across five roles, more hours than there are in a seven-day week.
According to evidence summarised in court, the alleged employment period ran from February 2020 to September 2023. C. is said to have earned almost £350,000 from eight employers over that period, including Tower Hamlets Council, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, an NHS trust, the Department of Health and Social Care, the UK Health Security Agency, the Department for Business and Trade, the Food Standards Agency and the Home Office.
Prosecutors allege that the first overlapping roles were a council post and a Defra job. A third position at an NHS trust followed in 2022, before further roles were added. The court heard that by May 2023 he was allegedly being paid for five full-time jobs.
The prosecution also told the jury that C. used remote working and sick leave to conceal the overlap. He was allegedly signed off sick from some roles while continuing to work elsewhere. During one video call, prosecutors said he appeared to use make-up to look unwell; that account is part of the prosecution evidence, not an established finding.
The alleged frauds came to light after concerns about his employment were examined, and the case has now reached trial. The government’s National Fraud Initiative describes its work as matching data between public bodies to identify possible fraud, errors and overpayments, including payroll anomalies.
The case comes amid continuing debate about hybrid work in the public sector. It cannot by itself establish that remote working caused the alleged conduct, or that similar arrangements are generally unsafe. Those questions are separate from whether the prosecution can prove its specific allegations beyond reasonable doubt.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- A trial has begun over allegations involving multiple public-sector jobs.
- The defendant denies the charges.
- The government uses data matching to identify possible payroll fraud and errors.
Left
Arguments The case should not be used to blame flexible work or ordinary employees for one alleged abuse. The priority should be better management, fair investigations and safeguards that protect staff who are genuinely ill.
Values Workers’ rights, public services and evidence-based policy.
Consequences A broad return-to-office response could reduce flexibility without addressing weak supervision or poor payroll controls.
Centre
Arguments Public bodies should retain hybrid working where it works, while requiring clear declarations of secondary employment, stronger payroll checks and accountable line management.
Values Proportionality, administrative competence and due process.
Consequences Targeted controls could protect public money without discarding arrangements that many organisations use successfully.
Right
Arguments People paid from public funds must be transparent about their commitments, and the state should impose stricter checks when several public employers are involved.
Values Public accountability, value for money and trust in government.
Consequences Tighter monitoring or more office-based supervision may deter abuse, although it could increase costs and restrict legitimate flexible working.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Priya Shah — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The opening of the trial, the charges and the prosecution evidence are supported by two open court reports. The wider explanation of payroll matching is supported by GOV.UK and is kept separate from the allegations in this case.
- confirmed The trial opened at Southwark Crown Court on 13 October 2026. — Reported by The Independent and Court News UK. source
- confirmed Prosecutors said the defendant was contracted to work 183 hours a week across five roles. — The figure was reported as evidence heard by the jury. source
- confirmed The court heard that almost £350,000 was earned from eight employers between February 2020 and September 2023. — Reported by The Independent and Court News UK as court evidence. source
- confirmed The defendant denies nine counts of fraud. — Stated in the report of the trial opening. source
- confirmed The National Fraud Initiative uses data matching to identify possible fraud, errors and overpayments. — Described in the official GOV.UK case studies. source
Editor's note
The article reports the opening of a trial and attributes the contested details to prosecutors and court evidence. There is no verdict, and the case does not demonstrate that remote working generally causes fraud.Sources
- Civil servant used ‘remote working and sick leave’ to juggle several jobs, court hears — The Independent
- Working from home allowed civil servant Kashim Chowdhury to hold down five full time jobs — Court News UK
- NFI: public sector case studies and testimonials — Public Sector Fraud Authority, GOV.UK
More on this in other media
- The Guardian — „public sector”
- BBC News — „public sector”
- Sky News — „public sector”