Confiscating the proceeds of crime
In addition to prosecuting them for their crimes, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is determined to hit criminals where it hurts them the most in their wallets.
On 21 January, three Gloucester builders, Nicholas Harris, Mark Dixon and Matthew Higgins, who made more than £1 million by conning householders, received sentences totalling more than 18 years at Bristol Crown Court. But their punishment will not end there. As is usual in such cases, the defendants' finances are currently being thoroughly investigated under the Proceeds of Crime Act so that we can confiscate money they made from their criminal activity.
When a defendant is convicted the CPS can ask the court to institute confiscation proceedings against them to recover the financial value of the assets they have obtained as a result of their offending. If we consider there is a danger that a defendant may try to dispose of assets before we can start the necessary proceedings, we can ask the court to make a Restraint Order to stop the defendant from doing so. We can also use our powers to take cases back to court if an offender tries to delay or avoid payment.
Last year (1 April 2009 31 March 2010) the CPS in Gloucestershire made 49 orders under the Proceeds of Crime Act and just under £1 million was recovered from offenders.
Under an incentive scheme introduced by the Home Office the CPS can receive up to 18% of a confiscation order, thus helping to recoup some of the costs of the original prosecution. Taxpayers should not have to fund the full cost of prosecuting criminals and prosecution costs provide a significant part of the CPSs budget (£65 million in the last year).
Making sure crime does not pay
Sometimes we can recover a considerable amount of money from criminals in a single hit. In July 2010, confiscation orders to a total value of £541,000 were made against Rajinder Dutt, Shoukat Yaqoob, Simon Harrison, Christopher Dewey and Siraz Bobat, who had all been convicted of drugs offences. But the largest confiscation order ever made in Gloucestershire was for £900, 388.53, made against Mrs Fairnetty Goodwin in November 2008.
Members of Goodwins family had been responsible for a series of deception offences against elderly people, charging extortionate rates for making shoddy repairs to peoples driveways. 19 elderly victims were targeted by the Goodwins over a two year period. Fairnettys son Darren pleaded guilty to three counts of obtaining property by deception and asked for a further four offences to be taken into consideration. His cousin Kenny pleaded guilty to three similar offences shortly afterwards.
Detectives seized many items from Fairnettys home including a number of luxury cars, quantities of valuable jewellery and large amounts of rare china, as well as £150 in cash found in the garden shed.
Goodwin failed to pay £466,985.39 of the £900, 388.53 and was prosecuted for non payment. In August 2009 the enforcement court found that she had failed to make sufficient efforts to sell a house, a Mercedes car, jewellery, a Rolex watch and Royal Worcester china to a total value of £378,000 since the order was made. For this offence she was sentenced to 957 days in prison.
Commenting on the case, Adrian Foster, at that time Chief Crown Prosecutor for Gloucestershire, said: The additional sentence in this case shows that the CPS, the courts and the police will robustly enforce confiscation orders to recover criminal assets. Even after she has served this additional prison sentence, Fairnetty Goodwins debts will still be outstanding and we will continue with any necessary action against her until all the proceeds of the crimes she was party to have been repaid.
