Website created & powered by WayOutWebs.com   
© 2007 all rights reserved

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   English   Albanian    bulgarian    Lithuanian    Romanian

 

   Home    Murder/Manslaughter    Serious Fraud

 

    Sexual Offences    Other Serious Offences    Testimonials

 

Serious Fraud / Moneylaundering

A Serious Fraud Office prosecution where the client and others were charged with conspiracy to defraud banks out of £310million. The client was on bail throughout. I supervised this case for another firm of solicitors based in the City of London. The prosecution case lasted from September 2007 to February 2008 following which we made application of “no case to answer” which succeeded and a formal not guilty verdict was recorded. The three co-defendants were all found guilty and received custodial sentences of up to 10 years. This was a very complex case and involved a very large amount (over 500,000 pages) of documentation.

The clients are 2 of 38 suspects on police bail in relation to a multi £million fraud. Clients are due to return to the police station in January 2011.

The client was jointly charged with 3 others of conspiracy to defraud a bank out of £280million. The client who was an American national was granted bail by the crown court. Huge amount of prosecution evidence had to be considered, witness statements taken from client’s business associates in USA and defence trial bundles produced. After a three-month trial a re-trial was ordered after there were allegations of jury tampering. The retrial lasted for another three months. The Jury was unable to reach a verdict after 10 days of deliberations. The Prosecution did not seek a retrial.

The client was jointly charged with 15 others of evasion of VAT and excise duty totalling over £10million. Client was on bail throughout. In December 2010 the prosecution offered no evidence and not guilty verdicts were recorded. This was a very complex case and involved consideration of a very large amount of documentation (over 30,000 pages).

The client was arrested in April 2009 for conspiracy to defraud various banks out of £25million but in May 2010 police confirmed that no further action was to be taken against the client.

Client together with one other and persons unknown alleged to have obtained goods/services from the Internet using 100’s of compromised credit/debit cards and obtained goods/services to the value of £140,000. Prosecution eventually accepted a guilty plea on the basis that the client had only obtained goods to the value of £10,000.

The client is one of 11 individuals on police bail for a very complex fraud involving over a £1million. Due to the complexity of the case, the vast amount of documentation and the number of suspects involved the police investigation has lasted nearly two and a half years. The client is due to return to the police station in November 2010.

The client was arrested in March 2009 for money laundering (over £2million involved). In May 2010 police confirm no further action to be taken against the client.

The client was jointly charged with 4 other defendants of money laundering and VAT offences involving over £5million. The client was on bail throughout. For various reasons trial did not take place for two years. However during this time we found out that Customs and Excise had inadvertently served one of the co defendants with some material, which we had not received. We applied for disclosure of the same material. The prosecution argued that whilst the material was of a “Highly Sensitive” nature it was completely irrelevant to this case. On our application for disclosure the Crown Court Judge ordered the prosecution to serve this material on all the defendants. The prosecution appealed to the Court of Appeal unsuccessfully. As a result the prosecution offered “No Evidence” on all the charges and a ‘Not guilty” verdict was recorded.

Although the police were initially advised by the Crown Prosecution Service lawyer to charge my client who is a doctor with fraud and theft I made representations to the officer in the case and Crown prosecution Service to the effect that they client’s actions could not have amounted to a fraud by representation as alleged, following which, they agreed not to charge my client and no further action was taken against him.