DRC Forensics Ltd - POCA

1. DRC FORENSICS IS A FIRM OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS SPECIALISING IN FORENSIC ACCOUNTING AND EXPERT WITNESS WORK INCLUDING DEFENDING “POCA” CASES.
2. THE PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 2002 IS GENERALLY REGARDED AS FAIRLY PENAL, GIVING THE PROSECUTION THE ABILITY TO USE A SLEDGEHAMMER TO CRACK A NUT! IT COMES INTO OPERATION FOLLOWING CONVICTION, WHERE THE PROSECUTION REQUEST THE COURT TO PROCEED TO CONFISCATION BY DECIDING IF THE DEFENDANT HAS A CRIMINAL LIFE STYLE AND IF HE HAS BENEFITED FROM HIS CRIMINAL CONDUCT.
3. THIS IS NORMALLY DEALT WITH BY THE PROSECUTION ISSUING A STATEMENT OF INFORMATION WHICH GOES THROUGH THE POSITION AND ARRIVES AT A FIGURE OF TOTAL BENEFIT AND AVAILABLE AMOUNT, WITH SUPPORTING APPENDICES/DOCUMENTS SHOWING HOW THE AMOUNTS ARE ARRIVED AT. SUBJECT TO DEFENCE RESPONSE, THE COURT WILL BE ASKED TO CONFIRM THESE AMOUNTS AND THEREFORE THE AMOUNT PAYABLE BY THE DEFENDANT, USUALLY WITHIN SIX MONTHS. A PERIOD OF IMPRISONMENT, IN LINE WITH THE AMOUNT PAYABLE, WILL BE IMPOSED BY THE COURT, WHICH WILL APPLY IN DEFAULT OF PAYMENT. IF THE IMPRISONMENT IS IMPOSED, UNLIKE COURT FINES, THAT DOES NOT WIPE OUT THE AMOUNT PAYABLE AND ACTION CAN STILL BE TAKEN TO COLLECT IT.
4. THE AMOUNT PAYABLE CANNOT EXCEED THE AMOUNT OF THE BENEFIT, BUT CAN BE, AND OFTEN IS, LESS THAN THE BENEFIT. IN THAT SITUATION, THE “EXCESS BENEFIT” CAN BE RECOVERED IN FUTURE IF THE DEFENDANT “COMES INTO FUNDS”.
5. IT FOLLOWS IN MOST SITUATIONS, THAT WHILST THE AVAILABLE AMOUNT IS IMPORTANT TO THE DEFENDANT, THE TOTAL BENEFIT FIGURE IS VERY IMPORTANT. THAT CAN BE PARTICULARLY SO, IF THE CROWN ARE ALLEDGING HIDDEN ASSETS AS PART OF THE AVAILABLE AMOUNT.
6. IN THE EARLY DAYS OF POCA WE USED TO FIND THAT THE PROSECUTION’S CALCULATIONS WERE VERY CRUDE, OFTEN CONTAINED MANIFEST ERRORS AND DUPLICATION SO THAT IT WAS VERY EASY TO MAKE LARGE REDUCTIONS TO THE BENEFIT FIGURE. ONE OF THE WORST EXAMPLES WE’VE SEEN OF THAT WAS A PONZI FRAUD CASE WHERE THEIR BENEFIT FIGURE WAS £25M. ONE PART OF THIS WAS £2.5M WITH AN APPENDIX SHOWING DETAILS OF HOW IT WAS MADE UP WITH A TOTAL AT THE BOTTOM OF £2.5M. HOWEVER THE SCHEDULE ADDED UP TO ONLY £200K AND REQUESTS FOR FURTHER INFORMATION MET WITH A TERSE RESPONSE THAT ALL THE INFORMATION WAS THERE, THERE WERE NO FURTHER PAGES OR DETAILS AND THE TOTAL WAS CORRECT. THAT WENT ON UNTIL THE HEARING AND MEETING WITH THE CPS FINANCIAL INVESTIGATOR AT COURT, WHEN ON SHOWING HIM THE POSITION HE ADMITTED THAT IN ARRIVING AT THE TOTAL THE DATE OF EACH ITEM HAD BEEN ADDED IN AS WELL AS THE AMOUNTS. THAT TOTAL BENEFIT WAS AGREED AT £5M.
7. THINGS HAVE IMPROVED IN THAT GREATER CARE IS TAKEN BY THE PROSECUTION IN PRODUCING THEIR FIGURES AND THERE IS LESS LIKELIHOOD OF LARGE ERRORS OR DISCREPANCIES AND THEY DO MAKE SOME EFFORT TO ELIMINATE OBVIOUS TRANSFERS BETWEEN BANK ACCOUNTS AND OTHER DUPLICATION. HOWEVER IN OUR EXPERIENCE, THEY DO STILL VERY MUCH GO FOR THE LARGEST BENEFIT FIGURE THAT THEY CAN COME UP WITH, MAKING LITTLE EFFORT TO TRACE ITEMS AND MAKE REALISTIC REDUCTIONS. THEY THEN GO FOR THE LARGEST AVAILABLE ASSETS THAT THEY CAN IN ANYWAY JUSTIFY AND DO NOT NEED MUCH JUSTIFICATION TO INCLUDE TAINTED GIFTS AND HIDDEN ASSETS, WHICH CAN BE DIFFICULT TO DEAL WITH AS IT IS HARD TO PROVE A NEGATIVE.WE FIND THAT LARGELY THIS HAS TO BE DONE BY AS FAR AS POSSIBLE EXPLAINING ALL TRANSACTIONS AND ELIMINATING/REDUCING THE BENEFIT.
8. WE HAVE ACHIEVED A HIGH DEGREE OF SUCCESS IN THE POCA CASES THAT WE HAVE HANDLED.
   

David Cook JP FCA MAE