And right there lies some hard evidence, which massages the entire matter quite considerably IMHO.
The submission could quite easily be between Dec 13 - to on or about 3rd July, dishonestly and intending to make a gain for herself or another, or expose another to risk of loss by way of false representation, which she knew might not be true and/or misleading, namely that she flew 'solo' and 'alone' in breach of section 1/2 of the Fraud Act 2006.
Was it all worth it? Well, she found two, if not more, affluent males to finance her jolly when all she needed to say from the outset was that the aircraft owner/instructor was riding shotgun with her to promote GA Aviation, if she really had to do it. An award/s? I don't think so.
If she can get some very simple facts like this wrong, one wonders what her logbook looks like? Lets not go there. The phrase 'can of worms' springs to mind. I would suggest that the entries should be P1/S