The Proceeds of Crime Act (2002)

This month, one of our Criminal Investigations Managers, Nathan Salmon explains how the SIA uses the (Proceeds of Crime Act (2002) to recover the profits made from offending within the private security industry.

Our blog aims to discuss developments in the private security industry and to provide further insight and opinion on our work. We look forward to having an on-going discussion with you; share your comments and opinions.

__________

Over the last 12 years, the SIA has been investigating and prosecuting anyone who repeatedly shows that they do not care about being licensed or working within the law. Our Partnerships and Interventions department does this by encouraging those working in the private security industry to stay within the law (the Private Security Industry Act). You can find out more about our enforcement activity on our website.

The SIA licence is a way to safeguard the industry and general public, and it is our responsibility to make sure that only ‘fit and proper’ people work in the industry. Those who ignore us and disregard the importance of licensing could be barred from operating in private security and prosecuted.

We do not always prosecute but investigate and consider whether there are public safety risks or if we need to protect the integrity of the private security industry or our licensing system.

The Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA) and repeat offenders

In recent years, we noted that some security companies were being investigated repeatedly. We had to do something because we didn’t want businesses treating court fines as a type of tax where the level of profit for working outside the law is worth the potential penalties any judge or court may give.

In 2015, the government amended POCA to include to regulatory bodies like us and we applied to take advantage of these powers. POCA is a law that means any money made from criminal activity can be recovered. It is also used by the likes of local authorities, HMRC and the Police to name a few.

We started using POCA in November 2015 to financially investigate companies and individuals who make a profit from criminal activity in the private security industry. Since then, we have employed financial investigators. They are accredited to use POCA to investigate and confiscate assets.

A recent example of our use of POCA is the case of Billy Jones, a security director who continued to work despite having had his Security Industry Authority (SIA) licence revoked. He was ordered to pay £300,000 at Cardiff Crown Court, in April 2019. This kind of conviction removes the benefit of working outside the law in the private security industry.

How does the SIA use POCA?

Our Criminal Investigations Team, is part of our Partnerships and Interventions department and is responsible for the SIA’s criminal investigations. This includes Accredited Financial Investigators (AFIs) who are able to legally present financial information in court. AFI’s are unique and very important because they have the power to ask financial institutions for information and use this to build a clear picture of someone’s financial status.

There are currently two main ways that our AFI’s can use POCA:

  1. Restraining assets
    AFI’s can apply to the court to restrain the assets of people under financial investigation. This makes sure that the money or assets of anyone we are prosecuting cannot be sold or dissipated before a court case ends. For example, for someone who is being investigated, the amount they can withdraw from their bank account can be restricted and their assets frozen.
  2. Confiscating assets
    Once convicted, a court can order a person to pay an amount of money based on how much they made through criminal activity. If they fail to pay this money, they could end up in prison and when released they would still need to pay this amount. In some cases, life-changing amounts of money can be confiscated by the courts. How POCA figures are calculated is shaped by case law, meaning specific cases determine how the calculations should be applied. We’re really pleased to have contributed to this and case law specific to the security industry exists.

During POCA proceedings, the people we’re investigating may see their lifestyle change. Due to current case law and depending on the situation, how much we confiscate may be the entire value of a security contract and not just the profit. This is because the turnover from a security contract may be a significant figure, a business or person might have to pay back hundreds of thousands of pounds. Selling assets like houses, cars or investments, to pay back the proceeds of their crime may be required.

If you’re wondering where this money goes, most of it returns to the Treasury. A proportion is allocated to the investigating organisation, which we can use to fund future financial investigations. In practice, we get no more than 34%. The money can also be allocated towards good causes, and we are exploring opportunities that will benefit the private security industry.

What will the SIA do with POCA in the future?

Over the next few months, we want financial investigations to become increasingly a core part of the way we prosecute at the SIA. This is really important because it is how we can guarantee that criminal profits are not reinvested, into “phoenix” companies that are essentially the same companies with a different name that have been set up after a criminal conviction. Our ability to use POCA should act as a warning to businesses seeking to operate outside private security regulations – you risk not only your business, but potentially your personal assets as well.

We are making really good progress and the volume of criminal cases under consideration has never been higher. Our success with POCA strengthens our regulation of the private security and we will continue to work with Regional Asset Recovery Teams and Police partners so that those who want to profit from illegal and poor business practice are removed from the private security industry.

Advertisements

How we are tackling identity theft

In the last months, two of our prosecutions cases have highlighted how we have tackled the fraudulent behaviour of some licence holders and the challenges we face.

This month, our Director of Partnerships and Interventions, Dave Humphries, discusses our counter fraud initiatives and the steps we took in these cases.

Our blog aims to discuss developments in the private security industry and to provide further insight and opinion about our work. We look forward to having an on-going discussion with you; please share your comments and opinions.

__________

Most licensing systems are based on a set of standards and for us at the SIA our system is designed to ensure only appropriate people are given the licence to operate. This involves a number of checks to prove identity that people have the relevant qualifications, checks on criminality and verifying that a person has the right to work in the United Kingdom. Most applicants provide the information we need to make a considered decision.

But what happens when someone knows they will not qualify for a licence, but is determined to get one?  They may test the robustness of our checks and they may submit false documents to do so. We are constantly alert and we do all we can do to address specific threats.

One particular type of fraud that we face is identity theft.  It is not the only category of fraud we have come across, but it was a feature in two recent cases.

These two recent investigations have involved fraudsters stealing the identities of others, but being prosecuted by the SIA for their actions. In both cases, the fraud involved not only an attempt to bypass our online licensing system, but the two individuals also tried to get around the requirement of proving their identity by taking on the full identity of another, to get an SIA licence.

The first fraudster was Moses Oshunkoya who knew the person whose identity he targeted.  He used their personal information to the point that he was able to gain a passport under this new identity.  Using this false identity Oshunkoya got as far as fraudulently gaining an SIA licence.  Nonetheless, our investigation of him resulted in a criminal prosecution.

The second case was Kazeem Oladimeji who was more contrived in his approach. He sought out a former SIA licence holder no longer working within the industry.  He adopted that identity by purchasing a fraudulent passport in the victim’s name. He changed the licence holder’s address, enabling Oladimeji to replace an SIA licence.  Again, the outcome was a successful criminal prosecution.

Both examples show the real threat posed by identity theft.  In both cases, the victims who had their identity stolen contacted us. Once we were aware, we investigated and prosecuted the offenders to ensure their fraudulent activity was brought to an end.

What are we doing to combat such activity?

Thankfully, processing changes in recent years have and will make future cases like this less likely.  For example, we introduced personal online accounts which are password protected. This reduces the ability for fraudsters to engage with us without having access to the online accounts.

We have also made improvements to the way we verify documents. We have improved technology to better identify fraudulent identity documents.  When we do find instances of fraud, we take robust action with our enforcement partners to ensure such documents are taken out of circulation.  Finally, as these two cases highlight, we prosecute the fraudsters.

As the regulator of the private security industry, we play an important role in dealing with identify fraud and together with our partners, we take robust action to tackle such criminality.

Those working in the private security industry can support this by being our eyes and ears and reporting any fraud that they come across.  As with other types of criminality within the security industry; if you suspect fraud please report online or contact Crimestoppers.  Specific information and how the fraud was identified will enable us to take positive action.

The Review of the SIA Published by the Home Office – What is to Come

This month our chief executive talks about the Home Office’s review of the SIA. He discusses the important role the private security industry plays in public safety.

This blog exists to discuss developments in the private security industry and to provide further insight and opinion on our work. Please share your comments and opinions and engage in an on-going discussion with us.

 __________

On the 7th June the Home Office published the tailored review (formerly known as a triennial review) for the SIA. You can find it here.

For a number of reasons the review has been a long time coming. But now it is here, we welcome its publication and the important contribution the private security industry has made to its recommendations.

The private security industry is a thriving sector covering a range of services, many of which have a direct bearing on public safety. We are all used to seeing private security operatives in our everyday lives in shopping centres, pubs, leisure facilities, industrial settings and at events.

The review recognises the vital role the private security industry plays in public protection and national security. It also affirms that there is a clear need for regulation in the industry. The review acknowledges the role of the SIA in raising standards and our contribution to safeguarding, public protection and national security.

Many of the recommendations of this review reflect the SIA’s published priorities, some of which we are already delivering successfully. For example, we continue to focus on further reducing violence and criminality. As part our drive to improve standards and strengthen the Approved Contractor Scheme (ACS) we have recently completed a comprehensive review of the ACS. The outcomes of this review will be implemented in the spring of 2019.

Going forward we will be reviewing the qualifications and training of those working in the industry to further improve knowledge and skills to facilitate even more effective protection of the public.

The heightened security threats from terrorism in recent years have served to bring a sharper focus on the role that private security can play and whether its capabilities are being used by the state to the fullest potential.

We have been facilitating greater collaboration between the counter terrorism (CT) law enforcement community and the large numbers of security operatives in areas such as door supervision, guarding and CCTV. We are also exploring with the CT community how the private security industry can be better equipped with knowledge and skills to reduce the threat to the public from a terrorist attack.

A key part of our plan remains the delivery of excellent services at the lowest possible cost. We strive to keep fees for those we regulate as low as possible and have reduced our costs by 27% since 2010. Further efficiencies have enabled us to keep the licence fee at £220 over the last six years, despite costs rising with inflation. We have recently moved to a joint Government Hub and will continue to seek efficiencies. We are currently working with the Home Office to review fee levels.

We are aligned with the review in continuing to take an even more risk-based approach to regulation with a sharper focus on non-compliant individuals and businesses, placing less of a regulatory burden where standards have been met or exceeded.

We will work with the Home Office and Devolved Administrations to implement all parts of this review that the Government wishes to take forward. We also stand ready to take on any additional areas of regulation, should the Government ask us to do so.

Ultimately our work is dependent on partnership not just with the police and other public bodies, but with the industry itself. We seek, and continue to benefit from, the support and cooperation of those working in the private security industry and our many partners to provide effective regulation. We are grateful for that support and cooperation.

As we look to the future we look forward to continuing to work with the private security industry and our partners to deliver high quality regulation and public protection.