Butler County woman lied about husband to get $60K in Social Security benefits | TribLIVE.com
Regional

Butler County woman lied about husband to get $60K in Social Security benefits

Natasha Lindstrom
1637053_web1_WEB-budget2

A Butler County woman has pleaded guilty to receiving more than $60,000 in fraudulent Social Security benefits by lying about her husband, federal prosecutors said Thursday.

Pattie Lou Smith, 56, of Connoquenessing admitted to making false reports to the federal government on documents required to determine eligibility for benefits between December 2013 through February 2017, U.S. Attorney Scott W. Brady said.

Supplemental Security Income, or SSI, gives cash benefits to meet basic needs paid to people with disabilities or seniors who have little to no income. The program is run by the Social Security Administration, but SSI is funded by general tax revenues, not Social Security taxes.

Marital status and monthly income affect the amounts distributed.

When first applying for SSI benefits and for more than three years after, Smith lied by reporting that her husband was not part of her household, Brady said.

Smith received more than $61,000 to which she was not entitled, according to her guilty plea.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Carolyn J. Bloch prosecuted the case with help from the Social Security Administration’s Office of Inspector General.

Smith is scheduled to be sentenced on Jan. 9.

Natasha Lindstrom is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Natasha at 412-380-8514, [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Local | Regional
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.