Trial in Feldkirch

Undeclared work on construction site in Lauterach uncovered

The offenses of the two defendants were assessed differently by Judge Sandholzer.

(Bild: Dorn / Krone KREATIV)

Two Vorarlberg residents collected unemployment benefits although they were employed on a construction site in Lauterach (Vorarlberg). The two had to answer to the Feldkirch regional court on Friday.

It was an anonymous tipster who got the ball rolling. The law-abiding person had contacted the tax authorities at the beginning of last year and accused a house builder in Lauterach of alleged illegal employment on the building site. When three officers carried out an employment check on site shortly afterwards, the two accused fled. However, their identities are quickly established. The undeclared workers had left their work backpacks and ID cards behind. The accused later claimed that they had only had a beer on the construction site. But the investigation revealed otherwise.

In view of the fact that both the first defendant (34) and the second defendant (40) had unlawfully received unemployment benefits totaling around 9,700 euros from January to April 2023, they now have to answer to the court for serious fraud. In the trial on Friday, the first defendant pleaded not guilty. Although he admits that he is still unemployed, he otherwise refers to his statements to the police.

Business applied for in danger
There, the man had previously said that he had only helped with the construction work for a few hours. Which is why, at the end of the day, Judge Silke Sandholzer acquitted him of the charge of aggravated fraud. The case of the second defendant was different. He was found guilty by the Frau Rat and sentenced to a partial fine of 3600 euros. This is a bitter blow for the 40-year-old, because if the decision becomes legally binding, the man will also lose the business he applied for in the construction industry.

"Why didn't you just call the AMS and declare your employment?" the woman wants to know. Whereupon the defendant is quite naive and says: "I could have, because I thought I would have all my qualifications by the time I started building."

Judge remains firm
But the start of construction had been postponed twice. That is why he did not submit an invoice so that he could continue to be in the entrepreneur start-up program. He would have invoiced his management services later via his own company. "I wanted to do everything right." Despite repeated attempts by the defense to relent, not to put any obstacles in the way of the defendant and to allow him to diversion, the judge remained firm. "Social fraud is always difficult to diversion. In any case, I don't believe that the defendant has accepted responsibility."