A benefit cheat who falsely claimed thousands of pounds in disability allowance was caught out after a neighbour secretly filmed him carrying out extensive gardening.

Christopher Botting declared he could not bend over and only walk 10 metres from his front door to his car "if it's a good day".

He also told the Department of Work and Pensions: “I now accept that a wheelchair is my only option if I want to get out. I cannot get up as I have no strength in my right arm and have no way of bending to help myself.

Scroll down for video

“I cannot lift anything as my hand shakes and I drop things. I cannot raise my arms about my head.”

The 52-year-old father-of-two added that he had been forced to give up his hobby of gardening.

But his lies were exposed when neighbour Paul Wilson produced more than eight hours of film of him toiling for long hours in his garden in Filer Road, Halfway, Sheerness.

Now, profoundly deaf Botting, who has spina bifida and Crohn’s disease and sat in a wheelchair throughout his trial and sentencing, has been jailed for 10 months for the fraud which a judge condemned as “brazen” and “an affront to society”.

Maidstone Crown Court heard he submitted a claim in March 2010 for disability living allowance, setting out the various problems he said he had with his mobility.

VIDEO: Benefits cheat Christopher Botting gardening

As a result, he was paid almost £15,000 over almost two years to which he was not entitled.

Prosecutor James Ross said there was no issue with Botting receiving the allowance prior to 2010, but as a result of the false information he gave to the DWP he was awarded a high rate of mobility allowance and a middle rate of care allowance.

“The prosecution say when he filled in those documents in 2010 his condition was not as severe as he said,” Mr Ross added.

“As a result he was treated by the benefits system as someone who had a high degree of need and entitled to a considerable amount of money when, in fact, that was not the case.”

Mr Ross told a jury they may conclude that relations between Botting and his neighbour were not good.

“He would see Mr Botting in his garden quite frequently,” he said. “He was aware he was claiming disability living allowance.

"He was treated by the benefits system as someone who had a high degree of need and entitled to a considerable amount of money when, in fact, that was not the case" - Prosecutor James Ross

“Not only would he watch him and make a mental note and have his own opinion of how incapable Mr Botting was, he also had a camcorder.

“Eight or nine hours worth of footage was recorded by him. A key part of the prosecution case is this evidence.”

Despite the damning film evidence, Botting, who also needs an operation for a kidney stone, denied dishonest representation for obtaining benefit, but was convicted.

He was allowed to sit in the well of the court in his wheelchair and was assigned two “lip speakers” to relay the evidence to him because of deafness, before being wheeled away to start his sentence.

Archie Mackay, defending, submitted married Botting would have extreme difficulty in prison because of his deafness.

“It could bring claustrophobia,” he said. “He wouldn’t be able to hear steps coming towards his door or keys jangling.”

The court heard £76 a fortnight was being deducted from his benefits to repay the amount he defrauded, and £10,466 was still outstanding.

Describing Mr Wilson’s video footage as “remarkable”, Recorder Matthew Nicklin QC said: “It comprehensibly demonstrated that every single representation Mr Botting made to the DWP about his state of health and disability was false.

“It is so compelling and clear that it is the sort of footage that one expects to see on television programmes about benefit fraud.

“A striking feature of this case is the role played by Mr Botting’s neighbour. He recorded on video Mr Botting’s industry and toil in his garden, on and off, over nearly two-and-a-half years.

“At trial, Mr Botting characterised Mr Wilson as a man who was obsessed and pursuing a vendetta against him out of dislike for him.

“Mr Wilson filmed Mr Botting’s exploits in his garden for a very long period. In total, there were available some 10 DVDs of footage. Watching just a fraction of them took nearly two hours of the trial.

“Mr Wilson was exasperated at the inaction he saw on the part of DWP to investigate Mr Botting. In his evidence he said he was told that if it wasn’t on film the DWP were not interested in investigating.

“Whether it is true or not that the DWP takes this attitude, it was the catalyst for the remarkable and extensive cataloguing of Mr Botting’s industrious garden improvements."

Mr Botting’s only answer to the hours and hours of footage demonstrating the deception as to his disability was to suggest that Mr Wilson had in some unspecified way doctored the footage.

“In support of this preposterous - even ludicrous - claim Mr Botting advanced no supporting evidence. The risible nature of this claim perhaps risks obscuring the seriousness of the position.

"This sort of benefit fraud is an affront to society. It requires sentences in response that serve to punish and to serve as an example for others who might be tempted to make fraudulent claims" - Recorder Matthew Nicklin QC

“Mr Botting was prepared, brazenly and in open court, to advance a case that Mr Wilson was not only lying on oath, but that he had manufactured evidence to attempt to get him wrongly convicted.

“Those claims were false. Mr Wilson was a diligent and clearly honest witness. But the claims made against him are entirely in keeping with the Mr Botting’s deceitful nature.

“Mr Botting has lied in this case from the moment he submitted his fraudulent claim. He lied in that form, he lied in his interview, he lied in his defence statement and he lied in the witness box.

“He is an accomplished and practised liar. He probably thinks that it is all part of the game to make such serious allegations against people like Mr Wilson.

“He was said by Mr Botting to be obsessed with him. He may have been. But if he was, it was not out of spite against Mr Botting.

“He was motivated by indignation - indignation at the brazen nature of Mr Botting’s fraud and the fact that he appeared to be getting away with it.

“Mr Wilson said he had been working full-time over many years, sometimes up to 14 hours a day seven days a week to support his family and he had to watch as the State practically paid for Mr Botting’s garden improvements.

“The galling nature of that spectacle is what spurred on Mr Wilson to his conscientious film catalogue.”

Recorder Nicklin said Botting’s wife gave evidence in support of her husband, which the jury rejected.

“In support of his efforts to avoid a just conviction, Mr Botting was prepared to put his wife in jeopardy by allowing her to give false evidence on his behalf,” he continued.

“Many will view that as desperate, despicable or both.”

He added: “This sort of benefit fraud is an affront to society. It requires sentences in response that serve to punish and to serve as an example for others who might be tempted to make fraudulent claims.

“I am not prepared to suspend the sentence. The message must be understood that benefit fraud does not pay.

“Those who are guilty of it, like you, will pay back what you received and, in serious cases, will face being sentenced to imprisonment.”