Fraud: case research by

R v Hamilton 2008

2024-12-04 09:21:01 UTC

D went to v's house claiming payment was owed for fence panels, however b's son had already made full payment. D found guilty of a s2 fraud offence

Kapitene 2010

2024-12-04 09:24:27 UTC

D was an illegal immigrant who applied for a job. He signed a declaration stating that he was legally entitled to remain in the uk and showed a Congolese passport containing his details, photo and immigration stamp indicating that he had indefinite leave to remain in the uk. Ds ‘gain’ was the wages he was paid by the cleaning company and the victims loss is the wages paid out to him.

DPP v Ray

2024-12-04 09:25:10 UTC

D went to a restaurant and order a meal, later he realised he could not pay. He waited until there were no waiters around and ran off. The court stated he had exercised a deception by doing this.

R v Gilmartin

2024-12-04 09:28:57 UTC

Post dated cheques that the D knew would not met

R v Lambie- defendant used her own credit card knowing that authorisation had been withdrawn. She was convicted of obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception

charlesworthkayleigh — 2024-12-04 09:29:11 UTC

2024-12-04 09:30:45 UTC

MPC v Charles 1976- D's bank account overdrawn and he was warned by bank manager not to write more than one cheque a day for more than £30, he went to gamble at a casino, buying chips using a chequebook backed by a guarantee card issued by bank.

D's conviction was upheld, conned staff with a guarantee card into accepting cheques he knew wouldn't be honoured

R V Silverman 1987

2024-12-04 09:31:10 UTC

The appealant was convicted under Section 15(1) of the Theft Act 1968 for obtaining property by deception. alleged treating two sisters dishonestly in a property transaction. one sister issued a cheque of £2,875 to the appellant for work on the boiler and rewiring, including redecoration however, the firm did not attempt to reimburse the sisters for the incomplete work. sentence- 18 months imprisonment, with four months to be served immediately and the remainder suspended. Grounds for appeal- conviction challenged with leave of the Single Judge.

R v Barnard- the shopkeeper assumed he was a member of the university and therefore gave a discounted price. It was held that by wearing this garb the defendant was representing that he was a member of the uni. As he was not, this amounted to false representation

charlesworthkayleigh — 2024-12-04 09:31:12 UTC

2024-12-04 09:33:12 UTC

R v Kapitene 2010-D was illegal immigrant and applied for a job at a cleaning firm. He signed declaration he could work in UK, showed them a passport that he had a stamp for showing indefinite leave to remain in the UK and began work

The D's gain was the wages he was given and the V's loss was the wages he was handing out