Fraud

  • R v M:A £400 million VAT carousel fraud was complicated because the company used was deployed as a contra trader, allowing other companies to offset legitimate VAT repayments that had to be made. Investigations involved companies in Belgium and bank accounts held in the Dutch Antilles. 
  • R v S:Spanish companies were set up to carry out a £250 million mobile phone carousel fraud.
  • R v R: A smuggling operation involving cigarettes supplied from Lithuania through Poland and into the UK and avoidance of £6.5 million duty. Substantial quantities of cigarettes were recovered in 12 separate seizures. The investigation involved German interceptions made against Italian nationals. One of the cover loads used included holy water. 
  • R v A: A Chinese syndicate was arrested for importing counterfeit stock. Four containers arrived at Felixstowe and moved to warehouses. The stock was then sold through internet sites as discounted designer stock.   
  • R v A: An international revenue sharing fraud, which involved the setting up of premium telephone lines. These would have calls placed through them via a gateway device, allowing substantial profits to be earned. Bulgarian gangs were initially used to obtain large quantities of sim cards to facilitate the fraud, under false pretences, with stolen identities. 
  • R v A: This was a £60 million mortgage fraud involving numerous financial institutions and solicitors’ practices. A chartered surveyor would arrange for dishonest property valuations to be provided, on the basis of false commercial leases being in place. The valuations were used to obtain huge mortgage advances, with the funds transferred abroad, including £25 million to Pakistan alone. The case involved a Serious Fraud Office investigation lasting several years.
  • R v R: An accountant was arrested for masterminding a VAT fraud over a four-year period.
  • R v L & L: Two people were arrested 20 years after an alleged importation of cocaine into the UK and accused of laundering the profits from the alleged trafficking.
  • R v M: Fraud involving the raising of finance on high specification performance cars. These were later taken out of the jurisdiction and sold.
  • R v S: Insider bank fraud in which accounts held on a long-term arrangement would be illegally drawn down on the basis that the account holder would be unaware of withdrawals due to the length of time until their account matured.
  • R v K:Boiler room fraud involving four UK companies that targeted people wishing to sell motor vehicles by allegedly offering advertising space. There were hundreds of thousands of victims.
  • R v P:Boiler room fraud in which individuals were targeted with offers of non-existent investment opportunities
  • R v R: International fraud involving a £154 million cheque drawn on the Bank of America and lodged with Credit Suisse, to obtain a safekeeping receipt to be used to raise investment funds
  • R v A:Fraud involving the theft of more than £1 million from a refugee housing charity
  • R v S: The fraudulent transfer of “for sale” properties into the names of bogus purchasers, with mortgages then raised on the properties without the real owners’ knowledge
  • R v M: £600 million laundered through travel agents and High Street banks
  • R v PB: Successfully argued the defence of duress in the case of a bank manageress accused of transferring £475,000 to a co-defendant’s account.
  • R  v A:A multi-handed conspiracy to defraud a mobile phone company by using fraudulently obtained contracts and sim cards to make high tariff calls
  • R v S: A national mortgage fraud, set up by solicitors to allow investors to buy properties from distressed sellers. The finance was provided by a hedge fund company. 
  • R v C: Substantial fraud involving defendants who recruited people to make fraudulent tax credit applications for non-existent children.