A civil servant who made £280,000 working five full-time jobs repeatedly answered 'no' when asked if he was already employed by the government, a court has heard.
Kashim Chowdhury, 55, allegedly lied multiple times to secure overlapping jobs with organisations including the Home Office and the Department of Health and Social Care.
Between February 2020 and September 2023, he held down eight different jobs, earning a total of £349,378, Southwark Crown Court was told.
At the peak of his employment he was allegedly employed in five full-time posts and was contracted to work 183 hours a week.
Jurors were shown a series of job application forms where Chowdhury listed his work at Tower Hamlets council – but answered ‘no’ to questions about existing civil service employment.
Chowdhury allegedly told bosses he needed to work remotely to look after his elderly mother, and used sick notes to manage his workload.
But he would fail to turn up for virtual meetings while colleagues began to grow frustrated at his poor performance – unaware he was working at least one other full-time job at the same time.
At one point, he even applied white make-up in a bid to dupe bosses into thinking he was ill, his fraud trial heard.
Kashim Chowdhury, 55, allegedly lied multiple times to secure overlapping jobs with organisations including the Home Office and the Department of Health and Social Care. He is pictured here heading to Southwark Crown Court
At the peak of his employment he was allegedly employed in five full-time posts and was contracted to work 183 hours a week
When he did attend work, witnesses said Chowdhury appeared out of his depth and unable to complete rudimentary tasks.
Ian Jobson, a Core Response Officer for Government Recruitment Services, gave evidence on the documents and checks applicants undergo before taking up their posts.
The prosecution asked him questions relating to an application submitted on August 7 2022 for an export service project officer role at the Department for Business and Trade (DBT).
The form asked: ‘Are you already a civil servant or employed by a civil service accredited body?’
Chowdhury answered: ‘No.’
His employment history listed Tower Hamlets council, followed by St Joseph’s Hospice and Crisis UK.
The application also contained a declaration which Chowdhury accepted by selecting: ‘I agree to the declaration above.’
On a subsequent pre-employment check form, he again gave Tower Hamlets council as his most recent employer.
When he did attend work, witnesses said Chowdhury appeared out of his depth and unable to complete rudimentary tasks
Asked whether he had previously worked for the civil service, he answered ‘Yes’.
But he answered ‘No’ to questions about health issues, including whether any might affect his ability to undertake the activities outlined in the job advertisement.
Jurors were also shown a Home Office project manager application dated November 14 2021.
Again, the answer to the question about existing civil service employment was ‘No’.
Mr Jobson said the documents indicated a formal offer had been made, but did not establish whether Chowdhury had actually been hired.
Other applications examined in court had been rejected during initial screening or after interview, while some had been withdrawn.
They included roles at HM Revenue and Customs and the DBT.
Pieter Briegel, defending Chowdhury, questioned Mr Jobson about the difference between expressing interest in a vacancy, receiving an offer and actually taking up a job.
He asked whether applicants’ details were automatically entered into short application forms through their recruitment accounts.
Mr Jobson explained information including their name, date of birth and email address was automatically populated.
He added applicants received an informal offer before completing pre-employment checks, followed by a formal offer if those checks were passed.
Checks varied between departments and according to the requirements of each role, Mr Jobson explained.
‘Each role needs security clearance depending on the level of the role,’ he said.
Abigail Mounde, Chowdhury's line manager at the Department for Business and Trade from December 2022 to May 2023, previously described his performance as 'very poor'.
She told jurors: 'He was not operating at the grade I would expect.
'When he first joined the department he didn't ask any questions about the role.
'Any basic tasks I asked him to do he either did late or not to the standard I would have expected.'
She said that he struggled to organise a meeting with his colleagues when he first joined the department.
Ms Mounde said: 'He didn't do this. I wanted him to put in a meeting with the people he was meant to be working with.
'I remember being frustrated that he wasn't doing it because I had asked him to do it.'
She described the tasks as 'very basic'.
Ms Mounde added: 'It became apparent that I couldn't set him anything else because he couldn't do the minimum I had set him.
'I was concerned he wasn't proactive. He took no initiative which I would expect from someone with experience in project management roles to do.
'And he never asked any questions.'
At one point, Chowdhury was contracted to work 183 hours a week across his various jobs – more than the 168 hours that actually exist in seven days, jurors were told.
Chowdhury, of Whitechapel, east London, denies nine counts of fraud.
The trial continues.