Theft Act 1968 Offences
Dishonestly appropriating property belonging to another with intention to permanently deprive. Either-way. Maximum 7 years. Shoplifting under £200 is summary-only (s.176 Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014), maximum 6 months.
Entering a building as a trespasser with intent to steal, inflict GBH, or cause criminal damage; or having entered, committing one of those offences. Residential burglary: maximum 14 years. Commercial: 10 years. 3rd residential burglary triggers a mandatory minimum 3-year sentence (s.111 PCC(S)A 2000).
Theft using or threatening force immediately before or at the time of stealing. Indictable-only. Maximum life imprisonment. Street robbery (mugging) and organised commercial robbery attract different sentencing bands.
Having an article for use in connection with burglary or theft while not at home. Either-way. Maximum 3 years. Frequently charged where someone is found with tools, balaclavas, or other items suggestive of planned offending.
Fraud Act 2006 Offences
The Fraud Act 2006 created a single, broad fraud offence with three modes of commission. All carry a maximum of 10 years on indictment.
Dishonestly making a false representation — knowing it is or might be untrue — with intent to gain for oneself or another, or to cause loss. Covers insurance fraud, identity fraud, false invoicing, and online scams. No victim is required to have been deceived.
Dishonestly failing to disclose information you are legally obliged to disclose, with intent to gain or cause loss. Common in financial services, insurance applications, and benefit claims where a material change of circumstances is not reported.
Occupying a position of financial trust and dishonestly abusing it — with intent to gain or cause loss. Common in employee theft from employers, financial adviser misappropriation, and abuse of power of attorney.
Possessing an article (software, false documents, skimming devices) for use in fraud. Maximum 5 years. Also s.7: making or supplying articles for use in fraud.
Benefit Fraud & Money Laundering
Prosecuted under s.111A Social Security Administration Act 1992 (dishonest failure to notify a change of circumstances) or the Fraud Act 2006. The DWP/HMRC investigates. Overpayments are subject to civil recovery as well as criminal prosecution. A solicitor can negotiate civil settlement and challenge the prosecution case.
ss.327–329 POCA 2002 criminalise concealing, disguising, converting, or using criminal property. Maximum 14 years. The "criminal property" element is widely interpreted — you can be charged for handling money from another person's crime without knowing the specific offence.
On conviction for certain offences, the court must conduct confiscation proceedings. The prosecution can assert "criminal lifestyle" (triggering assumptions that all assets and expenditure in the past 6 years are the proceeds of crime). A solicitor challenges the benefit figure and the assessment of available assets.
The SFO investigates and prosecutes serious or complex fraud. Unlike ordinary police investigations, the SFO has powers under s.2 Criminal Justice Act 1987 to compel the production of documents and attendance for interview. Specialist representation is essential from the moment an s.2 notice arrives.
Frequently Asked Questions
I was only handling money — am I guilty of money laundering?
Handling money that is "criminal property" is an offence under POCA 2002 even if you did not commit the original offence that generated it. However, the prosecution must prove you knew or suspected it was criminal property. A "legitimate excuse" defence exists if you made an authorised disclosure (submitted a Suspicious Activity Report) before dealing with the funds. A solicitor can advise on whether knowledge or suspicion can be established on the evidence.
Can the DWP pursue me civilly and criminally at the same time?
Yes. Benefit fraud can result in both criminal prosecution and civil recovery of the overpaid amount. In practice, it is often possible to negotiate a civil settlement (repayment plan) which leads to the criminal prosecution being discontinued — but only where the prosecution agrees and the public interest test is not met for prosecution. A solicitor can advise on whether this approach is available in your case.
What is a "criminal lifestyle" finding under POCA?
Under s.75 POCA 2002, you have a "criminal lifestyle" if convicted of a "lifestyle offence" (listed in Schedule 2, including drug trafficking, money laundering, robbery, and people trafficking) or have benefited from a course of criminal activity totalling £5,000 or more. This triggers the statutory assumptions in s.10 — all property and expenditure over the past 6 years is assumed to be criminal unless you can show otherwise. This makes confiscation proceedings extremely serious.
Do I have to answer the SFO's questions?
Under s.2 Criminal Justice Act 1987, the SFO can require you to attend and answer questions, and to produce documents. Failure to comply is a criminal offence. However, answers given under compulsion in an s.2 interview cannot generally be used against you in a criminal prosecution (with limited exceptions). This is a complex area and specialist legal advice is essential before any SFO interview.
What are the elements of "dishonesty" in fraud?
Dishonesty is assessed using the Ghosh/Ivey test as confirmed by the Supreme Court in Ivey v Genting Casinos [2017] UKSC 67: the question is whether, given the defendant's own knowledge and belief about the facts, their conduct was dishonest by the standards of ordinary decent people. This is now an objective test — you cannot avoid a dishonesty finding simply because you personally did not think your conduct was dishonest.