R v. IS - Wolverhampton Crown Court.
Mr. IS instructed us after he had received a notice informing him that fresh confiscation proceedings were being pursued under section 22 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. The defendant was made the subject of a confiscation order in 2006 after he and his family were convicted of insurance fraud. He had pleaded guilty to obtaining motor-vehicle insurance where he had claimed on a policy of insurance when the vehicles never existed. The confiscation order was made for a benefit at £453,000 with a realisable asset amount of £66,000 which represented the value of the equity in his home.
The prosecution revisited the confiscation order in 2015 and re-imposed a restraint order. The defendant had been trying to sell his house and therefore the sale had to be abandoned until the conclusion of the new confiscation case. The house was revalued, and it was ascertained that due to the increase in the market since 2006, further equity was now available. Unfortunately, the defendant had not sought to ring-fence that asset when the original confiscation order was made. The defendant did not appreciate nor was he advised that the prosecution could take a second bite out of his house. On this occasion, matters were settled by agreement with an agreement that he would pay a further £6000 towards the confiscation order. However, by the time the property had been sold and equity had been released; and after the payment of fees and expenses. The prosecution benefited by a further £2000 only.
For further advice and action, please call or e-mail us.
