Lloyds worker defrauds 2.4m - sentence?!

[mrmr96]

Deva Link said:

Sure, and we're into the realms of wild speculation here, but if she was presenting invoices of £50K/mth then presumeably she'd need to add VAT. So she'd either have to use someone else's VAT number (would that work?) or possibly even register her fake company legitimately (strikes me as massively unlikely).

Perhaps the invoices were for contractors so would have VAT, but then HMRC might pick up that they'd never heard of the people.

Why do you need a real VAT number to put on a fake invoice?

[Deva Link]

mrmr96 said:

Why do you need a real VAT number to put on a fake invoice?

...because if the number wasn't real it would fail the validity check. There's a code embedded in the number. http://www.intonet-technology.co.uk/tools/CheckAVA...

[Steffan]

mrmr96 said:

Deva Link said:

Sure, and we're into the realms of wild speculation here, but if she was presenting invoices of £50K/mth then presumeably she'd need to add VAT. So she'd either have to use someone else's VAT number (would that work?) or possibly even register her fake company legitimately (strikes me as massively unlikely).

Perhaps the invoices were for contractors so would have VAT, but then HMRC might pick up that they'd never heard of the people.

Why do you need a real VAT number to put on a fake invoice?

Because VAT numbers can be checked. Over the phone. As others have said a very common and simple fraud. The Judiciary dislike finance frauds against employers by senior staff. It would appear there was no collusion which begs the question about the adequacy of the procedures involved.

I think that this will attract an extensive prison term, even for a first offence. She is selling her house for £750,000 in an attempt to repay the bank which shows contrition. I would expect a minimum of four years possibly longer.

[bga]

turbobloke said:

No segregation of duties?! Unless the submission record was falsified (or wasn't needed) and it was to a company, this sounds really basic as you say.

ETA 5 years

Edited by turbobloke on Wednesday 8th August 07:20

You would be surprised at the number of large organisations who operate limited controls over invoices under a certain value or of a certain type.

The argument is that it costs more to operate the control than they will save.

Unfortunately the financial justification is usually not based on any real evidence and often means much greater losses are incurred through not spotting genuine mistakes which are processed.

[Somewhatfoolish]

Deva Link said:

...because if the number wasn't real it would fail the validity check. There's a code embedded in the number. http://www.intonet-technology.co.uk/tools/CheckAVA...

Financial businesses don't charge VAT. Either that or my accountant when I was in the UK was lying to me and a very large rimming is coming my way one day soon...

[Eric Mc]

Somewhatfoolish said:

Deva Link said:

...because if the number wasn't real it would fail the validity check. There's a code embedded in the number. http://www.intonet-technology.co.uk/tools/CheckAVA...

Financial businesses don't charge VAT. Either that or my accountant when I was in the UK was lying to me and a very large rimming is coming my way one day soon...

No - many financial business ARE registered for VAT and they do charge VAT on some of the products and services they provide. Obviously, a lot of their income is VAT Exempt - but a lot of it isn't too.

[Somewhatfoolish]

Eric Mc said:

No - many financial business ARE registered for VAT and they do charge VAT on some of the products and services they provide. Obviously, a lot of their income is VAT Exempt - but a lot of it isn't too.

My business was never vat registered and it was making a hell of a lot more than the VAT threshold... does the threshold apply to total earninings or just the VAT-ratable ones?

[Du1point8]

Somewhatfoolish said:

Eric Mc said:

No - many financial business ARE registered for VAT and they do charge VAT on some of the products and services they provide. Obviously, a lot of their income is VAT Exempt - but a lot of it isn't too.

My business was never vat registered and it was making a hell of a lot more than the VAT threshold... does the threshold apply to total earninings or just the VAT-ratable ones?

So say you made 100k from you business, what did you do with it?

[Digga]

Deva Link said:

mrmr96 said:

Why do you need a real VAT number to put on a fake invoice?

...because if the number wasn't real it would fail the validity check. There's a code embedded in the number. http://www.intonet-technology.co.uk/tools/CheckAVA...

I'm baffled by how hard people think this is. You create a fake invoice which purports to be from a bona fide, VAT registered, living, breathing corporate entity. Then you put your own bank details into the recipient's details for the payment...

That bit (I thought) was simple. However, eventually, either a hawk-eyed accountant or a routine/random HMRC audit, will definitely pick it up.

[Eric Mc]

Somewhatfoolish said:

Eric Mc said:

No - many financial business ARE registered for VAT and they do charge VAT on some of the products and services they provide. Obviously, a lot of their income is VAT Exempt - but a lot of it isn't too.

My business was never vat registered and it was making a hell of a lot more than the VAT threshold... does the threshold apply to total earninings or just the VAT-ratable ones?

VAT able - but that does include Zero Rated items (but not Exempt or Outside the Scope).

There are lots of businesses or other entities that supply services that are mostly VAT Exempt or Outside the Scope. But they do enough trade with Standard and Zero Rated items or services to make it necessary to register for VAT.