Fraud definition

View the related checklists about Fraud

DPA suitability checklist

DPA suitability checklist Court's oversight of the interests of justice and fairness, reasonableness and proportionality The UK deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) regime provides for judicial oversight of DPAs. After negotiations as to the terms of a DPA have commenced and before it has been concluded, the court must determine: • whether it is likely to be in the interests of justice, and • that its proposed terms are fair, reasonable and proportionate Therefore, each factor must be supported by clear and persuasive proof in order to seek to persuade the court to approve the DPA. The declarations given under Schedule 17 Part 1, para 8 to the Crime and Courts Act 2013 (CCA 2013) to date provide insight into the court's approach as to when a DPA is suitable and this has, in turn, fed into the prosecutor's approach (see Practice Note: The SFO's approach to Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs) [Archived]). For detailed information on DPAs in general, the process followed by the court when considering whether to...

Privilege in criminal investigations—checklist

Privilege in criminal investigations—checklist The following are only suggested guidelines, given that each criminal investigation will turn on its own facts. This Checklist should be read in conjunction with Practice Notes: Legal Professional Privilege in criminal proceedings and Maintaining privilege during criminal investigations. Confidentiality is key and must be maintained. If a document or communication was not confidential when it was first made, or if it loses its confidentiality, it will generally not attract Legal Professional Privilege (LPP). In order to assert privilege, careful consideration should be given to whether it is legal advice privilege or litigation privilege which is being asserted, and different considerations will apply to each. Steps to maintain legal professional privilege At the outset In the event that the client seeks advice before the criminal investigation commences: Legal advice privilege • consider whether legal advice privilege applies, ie: ◦ is the communication confidential? If yes ◦ is the communication sent by a lawyer to their client or vice versa? If yes ◦ is the communication made...

View the related flowcharts about Fraud

SAR glossary codes and additional reporting routes—flowchart

SAR glossary codes and additional reporting routes—flowchart This Flowchart illustrates the most commonly used National Crime Agency (NCA) glossary codes to use when completing a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) via the SAR Portal, and the additional reporting routes you should consider. The full list of SAR Glossary Codes can be found in SAR Glossary Codes and Reporting Routes. Note 1 SARs regime The SARs regime is not intended as a means of reporting crime or matters relating to immediate risks to others. The SARs regime is designed for the purpose of reporting knowledge or suspicions of money laundering or terrorist financing under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA 2002) and the Terrorism Act 2000 (TA 2000). In addition to submitting a SAR to the NCA, you may therefore need to report the matter via other routes, eg where a crime is in progress or there is an immediate risk to a person. We have flagged where this may be appropriate. If possible, you should make these additional reports...

View the related practice notes about Fraud

Possessing or making articles for use in fraud

It is an offence for a person to possess, or have under their control, any article for use in the course of or in connection with fraud under section 6 of the Fraud Act 2006 (FrA 2006). The elements of the offence are that the defendant:•had in their possession or had in their control•an article•for use in the course of or in connection with any fraudThe Explanatory Notes to FrA 2006 set out that the wording of this offence draws on the offence of 'going equipped' in section 25 of the Theft Act 1968 and is essentially an extension of that offence. However, the offence under FrA 2006, s 6 is wider as it can be committed without the defendant leaving home.The offence is also based on the case law relating to the mental element of the offence of 'going equipped', which established that proof is required that the defendant had the article for the purpose or with the intention that it be used in the course of or in...

Sentencing fraud offences committed by individuals

The Sentencing Council (SC) has produced sentencing guidelines for fraud offences under the Fraud Act 2006 (fraud by false representation, fraud by failing to disclose information and fraud by abuse of position), false accounting under section 17 of the Theft Act 1968 or conspiracy to defraud under the common law for use in the magistrates’ court here and for use in the Crown Court (the Fraud Guidelines) here. The Fraud Guidelines apply to all individual offenders aged 18 and older sentenced on or after 1 October 2014, regardless of the date of the offence. The SC also publishes a number of overarching guidelines, which should be considered in respect of all sentencing exercises, see Practice Note: Sentences imposed following conviction. Among these, the General guideline—overarching principles (the General guideline) is specifically designed to be used in conjunction with offence specific guidelines and covers seriousness as well as providing expanded explanations for aggravating and mitigating factors, culpability and harm, see Practice Note: Sentencing Council General Guideline—overarching principles—Using the General Guideline in...

View the related precedents about Fraud

Letter to lenders governing appointment of creditors’ committee

Letter to lenders governing appointment of creditors’ committee To: The persons listed in Schedule 1 to this letter [insert names of Lenders] From: [insert name of solicitors for the Creditors' Committee or the name of the Chair] Date: [insert date] Appointment of Creditors' Committee We refer to the discussions at the meeting of creditors convened by [insert name of debtor company] (the Company) to discuss the proposed restructuring. 1 Definitions and interpretation 1.1 Definitions In this letter, unless otherwise provided: Business Day • means a day other than Saturday, Sunday and public holidays when clearing banks generally are open for business in London; Chair • means the Lender appointed to chair the Creditors' Committee under the Creditor's Committee Agreement; Commitment • means (a) any undrawn amount which a Lender has committed to make available to the Company (but excluding any undrawn uncommitted amounts); (b) the principal amount of a Lender's participation in any utilisation by the Company, in each case under the Finance Documents; Committee...

Confidentiality agreement — restructuring & insolvency

Confidentiality agreement — restructuring & insolvency This Agreement is made [insert day and month] 20[insert year] Parties 1 [insert name of debtor company] a company incorporated in [insert country eg England and Wales] under number [insert registered number] whose registered office is at [insert address] (the Company); and 2 The Creditors (as set out in the Schedule) (the Creditors); (each of the Creditors and the Company being a Party and together the Creditors and the Company are the Parties). Recitals (A) the Company agrees to disclose information to the Creditors and the Creditors agree to keep that information confidential and use it solely for the purposes of evaluating, negotiating, monitoring and implementing a [Standstill Agreement OR Restructuring Agreement]. (B) [insert any further recitals]. The parties agree: 1 Definitions and interpretation 1.1 Definitions In this Agreement, unless otherwise provided: Authorised Person • means any officer, employee, director, consultant, agent, affiliate or representative of the Creditors [the Reporting Accountant] and any other legal or financial...

View the related q&as about Fraud

On a relevant transfer under TUPE 2006, does the transferor’s liability for failing to prevent bribery, to the extent that it is not criminal liability, transfer to the transferee?

On a relevant transfer under TUPE 2006, does the transferor’s liability for failing to prevent bribery, to the extent that it is not criminal liability, transfer to the transferee? Bribery Act 2010 The Bribery Act 2010 sets out four offences: • bribing another person (also known as active bribery) • soliciting or accepting a bribe (also known as passive bribery) • bribing a foreign public official, and • failure of a commercial organisation to prevent bribery by an 'associated person' for its benefit For further information, see Practice Note: Bribery Act 2010: essentials for employment lawyers. The first three offences above apply to individuals and companies. The offence of failure to prevent bribery applies only to relevant commercial organisations. For information on the offence of failing to prevent bribery, see Practice Note: Bribery Act 2010: essentials for employment lawyers—Failure of commercial organisations to prevent bribery. See the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) Guidance on adequate procedures facilitation payments and business expenditure and the following documents (referred to in...

Is there any case law on an Article 75 insurer’s ability to avoid its liability to meet a judgment in circumstances where the claimant was travelling in a stolen vehicle? The claim made is not against the insurer of the vehicle the claimant was a passenger in but against another vehicle of which the insurers have Article 75 status.

Is there any case law on an Article 75 insurer’s ability to avoid its liability to meet a judgment in circumstances where the claimant was travelling in a stolen vehicle? The claim made is not against the insurer of the vehicle the claimant was a passenger in but against another vehicle of which the insurers have Article 75 status. Article 75 is an agreement between the Motor Insurers’ Bureau (the MIB) and its members under which the motor insurer will accept liability in certain cases where they would not be liable under the Road Traffic Act 1988 (RTA 1988) (as RTA insurer). An Article 75 insurer is the insurer who is providing cover against the compulsory risks set out in RTA 1988 and will remain the Article 75 insurer notwithstanding that—(i) the insurance was obtained by fraud, misrepresentation, mistake or non-disclosure of a material fact (even if a RTA 1988, s 152 declaration of entitlement to avoid liability under RTA 1988 has been obtained), and/or (ii) the cover has been...

View the related News about Fraud

City of London Police's IFED leads national operation against insurance fraud brokers

COPFS secures 29-year combined sentence in £6m NHS contract fraud case

The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) has secured convictions against four men for NHS procurement fraud totalling £6m between 2010-2017. The High Court in Glasgow sentenced former NHS officials Alan Hush and Gavin Cox alongside Oricom Ltd directors Adam Sharoudi and Gavin Brown to combined prison terms of 29 years for bribery, corruption, fraud and Proceeds of Crime Act offences. The case involved systematic abuse of NHS procurement processes in exchange for cash and benefits. All defendants face confiscation proceedings, with Brown and Sharoudi receiving ten year director disqualifications.

View the latest UK Parliament Acts documents on Fraud

3 . . .

. . .

7 Limits on period of detention without charge

In section 42(1) of the 1984 Act (conditions to be satisfied before detention without charge may be extended from 24 to 36 hours), for paragraph (b) there is substituted—“(b)     an offence for which he is under arrest is an arrestable offence; and”.