A BENEFIT cheat from Burnley insisted she had not been living with her partner until investigators found evidence they had a third child together while they were supposedly apart.

Mother-of-three Nicola Higginbotham falsely claimed nearly £18,750 in income support, housing benefit and council tax benefit over a three-year period, while claiming to be living unsupported on her own, Burnley Crown Court was told.

But Higginbotham gave birth to her third child with shift worker Brian Kearney, in October 2013, the court heard.

And prosecutor David Potter said that on their son Oscar's birth certificate, both listed the same home address in Moorlands Road.

Higginbotham, 28, admitted four benefit fraud offences and was given a 10-month prison sentence, suspended for two years.

Passing sentence Judge Mark Brown, Recorder of Preston, said he was prepared to give the defendant 'a chance' but warned her that any breaches of her punishment would be dealt with by himself 'and you will go to prison'.

Mr Potter said that Higginbotham's benefit claims had been 'dishonest from the outset', after she insisted she had been living on her own between October 2012 and July 2015.

Mr Kearney took out a number of credit agreements on white goods, listing their Moorland Road address for finance purposes, and a number of payments for the items were even made out of the defendant's bank account.

And regular credits were received into her own account from Mr Kearney, who continued to work. Mr Kearney also listed the Moorland Road house with his employers. He also described Higginbotham as his 'missus' on Facebook.

Mr Potter added: "Perhaps most significant of all has to be that around the time of her claiming that she was single...she gave birth to their third child, Oscar.

"The birth certificate showed them being the child's parents, with each listing their home address at the same house."

Interviewed by benefit fraud officials, Higginbotham insisted the couple had split up in 2012 over her partner's gambling problems. Quizzed again later, she maintained he had only moved back in for a brief period.

Philip Holden, defending, said his client had an on-off relationship with Mr Kearney and she now controlled their finances because of his gambling problems. If she was imprisoned he would be unable to look after their children because of work commitments.