Benefit cheat Brian Riley lived “a life of Riley” on the island paradise of Sri Lanka while cheating the taxpayer out of more than £22,000, a court heard.

Today he was starting an eight month jail sentence for claiming to live at Newark Street, West Bowling, Bradford, while pocketing the money.

Bradford Crown Court heard Riley, 58, claimed income support, council tax benefit and disability allowance for more than three years after setting up home in Sri Lanka.

He worked as a part-time organiser for the Anglo Lanka Foundation (pictured above) in the wake of the 2004 tsunami.

The charity, which had the motto “helping others to help themselves”, has now closed down due to a lack of funds.

Prosecutor, Nicholas de la Poer, told the court Riley stopped living in Newark Street in February 2005 but continued to claim benefits.

Now of Delamere Street, Marshfields, Bradford, he married a Sri Lankan woman in March last year. He left her in Sri Lanka to return to this country in May because of his health.

He pleaded guilty to failing to notify the authorities he was no longer resident in the United Kingdom.

Riley remortgaged the Newark Street property and sold it for £80,000 in September last year. He admitted further charges relating to the fact he had not told the Department for Work and Pensions his assets had increased.

Riley’s barrister, Sophie Drake, said there was no evidence of high living in Sri Lanka, but Judge Roger Scott said: “Ninety-nine point nine per cent of the population of the UK would regard a house in the idyllic island of Sri Lanka as being an unnecessary luxury.”

Miss Drake said Riley was a hard-working man until he underwent heart surgery in 2001. All his benefit claims were genuine at the outset and he had done two years’ charity work encouraging businesses to send second-hand tools and equipment to Sri Lanka.

Riley’s Sri Lankan home is up for sale for £20,000, the court heard. He will face confiscation proceedings to recover the money.

Judge Scott told Riley: “I regard the whole of the £22,000 as being spent on unnecessary luxury.

“Your case is different from many. You are a relatively well-off person now, with the proceeds of a house. It may be you will be able to repay the whole of the £22,000, but you have not as yet paid a penny back.”

After the case, a spokesman for the Department of Work and Pensions fraud team said: “This man thought he could live a life of Riley at the taxpayers’ expense. He was wrong.”