Sahota & Sahota Solicitors secured a suspended sentence for a client who pleaded guilty to fraud by abuse of position after our analysis reduced the agreed loss from the prosecution’s original figure of £107,980 to £77,805.
The case concerned money transferred from a family member’s bank account into our client’s account. Our client accepted that he had acted dishonestly and was advised to plead guilty. The question for sentence, however, was whether every transfer included in the prosecution’s figure represented a fraudulent loss.
The prosecution initially relied on the total value of the transfers, £107,980. Our team, led by Mr Kally Sahota, examined the banking material and prepared a detailed counter-schedule identifying the transactions our client accepted were dishonest.
This work established an agreed loss of £77,805, a reduction of £30,175 from the prosecution’s starting figure. Our client entered his guilty plea on a clear basis that reflected that amount.
The distinction mattered. Under the fraud sentencing guideline, a loss of £100,000 or more falls within Category 2. The agreed figure of £77,805 placed this case within Category 3, with a lower starting point for sentence. The court could therefore sentence our client on the basis of the loss he accepted, rather than the prosecution’s original calculation. The Sentencing Council’s fraud guideline sets the Category 2 threshold at £100,000 and Category 3 at £20,000 to £100,000. (sentencingcouncil.org.uk)
Financial loss was only one part of the sentencing exercise. We also instructed a psychiatrist to assess our client and prepare a report. The report assisted us in presenting his personal circumstances and mitigation.
Having considered the guilty plea, the agreed basis of plea and the mitigation, the Crown Court imposed a suspended sentence. Our client was therefore spared an immediate prison sentence. This while our client committed this fraud offence whilst on a suspended sentence albeit for a dissimilar offence.
Kally Sahota, Director of Sahota & Sahota Solicitors, said:
“Our client accepted responsibility for what he had done, and we advised him to plead guilty. But it was equally important that he was sentenced on an accurate figure. By working through the transactions and preparing a counter-schedule, we reduced the agreed loss by more than £30,000. That changed the sentencing category and allowed us to present the Court with a properly evidenced basis for sentence.”
Fraud cases often involve extensive banking records and disputed calculations. A guilty plea does not remove the need to test the prosecution’s account of the financial loss. In this case, careful analysis of the figures and specialist evidence made a significant difference to how our client’s case was presented at sentence.
Often, we are required to instruct a forensic accountant to review statements, invoices and figures, however on this occasion, we conducted the task and the prosecution accepted our counter-schedule.
If you are under investigation or facing a charge of fraud, Sahota & Sahota Solicitors can advise you from the police station through to the Crown Court. Call us on 0116 255 5155.
nts.
