|
matchmaker
Original Poster
3,266 posts
69 months
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-18...A few pies purchased as well, methinks. pissed off director said: Company director Peter Sutton said Lane had cost the firm about £300,000, due to tax and VAT payments, and put the "livelihoods of 20-plus people" in jeopardy. Selfish fat b  h 
|
|
|
mgtony
1,472 posts
59 months
|
She claimed she done it because she thought it would make her more attractive, well surely anything would have done that! Entertainment included "face painting", is this what the rest of us call make-up? The husband claimed not to know anything about it 
|
|
|
heppers75
2,281 posts
86 months
|
I suspect the irony here is that to make herself more attractive would have involved spending less, principally on pies!
|
|
|
roadsweeper
3,758 posts
143 months
|
Don't worry though, she got 20 months, that'll learn 'er! Alternatively, one could wonder whether ten months of internment (like to be ten after good behaviour) in return for £200k actually represents excellent value for money for someone like her. After all, how long would it take to earn that after tax for someone of her earning power? As long as she's spent it all, then she can't pay it back... Winnah! 
|
|
|
Oakey
13,745 posts
85 months
|
If she has equity in a house could it be recouped through that?
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Mr_B
4,741 posts
112 months
|
As usual with these cases of theft , no mention of them actually having to pay back the money. Does anyone ever pay back the cash in cases like this and the almost daily coverage of benefits cheats.
Why do i get the feeling theres a large chunk of people in the country who actually think its right she should keep her home, and would almost think it not fair to sell off her stuff down to the bare minimum for her to live.
|
|
|
10 Pence Short
27,632 posts
86 months
|
roadsweeper said: Don't worry though, she got 20 months, that'll learn 'er! Alternatively, one could wonder whether ten months of internment (like to be ten after good behaviour) in return for £200k actually represents excellent value for money for someone like her. After all, how long would it take to earn that after tax for someone of her earning power? As long as she's spent it all, then she can't pay it back... Winnah! Most likely she'll spend just over 6 months inside, then the period up until the halfway point (10 months) tagged on curfew at home, then the remaining 10 months released on licence. Seems quite lenient when you look at it, doesn't it?
|
|
|
Jasandjules
45,444 posts
98 months
|
It's a good job she didn't drive to tthe church at 150mph or then she'd be really in trouble.
|
|
|
Stu R
19,536 posts
84 months
|
Must have been a hell of a buffet.
|
|
|
hairykrishna
8,976 posts
72 months
|
10 Pence Short said: Most likely she'll spend just over 6 months inside, then the period up until the halfway point (10 months) tagged on curfew at home, then the remaining 10 months released on licence.
Seems quite lenient when you look at it, doesn't it? I agree, ~6 months inside in exchange for 200k doesn't seem like much of a deterrent.
|
|
|
Wacky Racer
20,284 posts
116 months
|
Jasandjules said: It's a good job she didn't drive to the church at 34 mph or then she'd be really in trouble. EFA 
|
|
|
Matt p
377 posts
77 months
|
Every office has a mental fat bird working in it.......
|
|
|
Dibble
7,620 posts
109 months
|
I've dealt with a few of these kinds of offences (frauds, drugs, large scale criminal enterprises, money laundering, etc). Where there is a "benefit", the court can order repayment of such a benefit (the court determines the amount). If the amount ordered isn't repaid, there is usually an additional custodial sentence. And the "benefit" still has to be repaid. If the defendant doesn't have any assets, the order can remain until as and when they DO accrue assets, which are then used to repay the benefit figure.
As a guide, if you use drugs money to buy a "bent" £25,000 Mercedes for £5,000, your benefit isn't £5k, it's £25k. POCA legislation is very useful in these kinds of cases.
|
|
|
hairykrishna
8,976 posts
72 months
|
Dibble said: I've dealt with a few of these kinds of offences (frauds, drugs, large scale criminal enterprises, money laundering, etc). Where there is a "benefit", the court can order repayment of such a benefit (the court determines the amount). If the amount ordered isn't repaid, there is usually an additional custodial sentence. And the "benefit" still has to be repaid. If the defendant doesn't have any assets, the order can remain until as and when they DO accrue assets, which are then used to repay the benefit figure.
As a guide, if you use drugs money to buy a "bent" £25,000 Mercedes for £5,000, your benefit isn't £5k, it's £25k. POCA legislation is very useful in these kinds of cases. That makes a great deal more sense.
|
|
|
10 Pence Short
27,632 posts
86 months
|
Dibble said: I've dealt with a few of these kinds of offences (frauds, drugs, large scale criminal enterprises, money laundering, etc). Where there is a "benefit", the court can order repayment of such a benefit (the court determines the amount). If the amount ordered isn't repaid, there is usually an additional custodial sentence. And the "benefit" still has to be repaid. If the defendant doesn't have any assets, the order can remain until as and when they DO accrue assets, which are then used to repay the benefit figure.
As a guide, if you use drugs money to buy a "bent" £25,000 Mercedes for £5,000, your benefit isn't £5k, it's £25k. POCA legislation is very useful in these kinds of cases. It would be interesting to see what POCA could recover from her. As far as I can see it, her previous employers are entitled to commence Civil Proceedings to recover their losses, in which case the court can hold back recovery under POCA rather than feel compelled to make an order. With regards to recovering property, what effect does it have in relation to her not having a "criminal lifestyle"? The court would be unable to make a presumption that any property obtained was as a result of criminal activity. Would this preclude them effectively ordering a house be sold to make good the amount demanded, or would they be able to order it?
|
|
|
TheEnd
12,108 posts
57 months
|
They'll be after their pound of flesh.
|
|
|
Ozzie Osmond
12,110 posts
115 months
|
mgtony said: She claimed she done it..... Oh dear. Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.
|
|
|
martin84
5,366 posts
22 months
|
Exactly how can a company run itself in such a way that one person can take £200k without somebody noticing sort of pretty quickly?
|
|
|
Eric Mc
67,260 posts
134 months
|
|
|
martin84
5,366 posts
22 months
|
Eric Mc said: They did notice it. Yes but only after the wedding. According to that article she was syphoning money off from them for three years!
|
|
