Private Prosecutions

Landlords Revenge – Prosecuting Rogues

3:01 PM, 27th October 2014, 12 years ago 24
Categories:

If you are angry about being ‘ripped off’ and being left out of pocket then you probably don’t relish the thought of spending money on solicitors or grovelling to disinterested authorities either!

There is another option though, which has been in existence longer than the police and the CPS, and which can be cost neutral regardless of whether you win or lose your case. Best of all, as well as the prospect of recovering what’s owed to you, you may also get the satisfaction of knowing that the person who ripped you off could serve a sentence behind bars, because a prison sentence could also be applied as a result of your actions.

Don’t get mad, get even!

LINK to http://privateprosecutions.org/

Do not be fobbed off by the authorities! Private Prosecutions

I got fed up of hearing stories about letting agents going out of business having plundered their client accounts and leaving both landlords and tenants out of pocket.

The police regularly tell victims that scenarios of this nature are “civil matters” and to seek advice from a solicitor. If you think about it, is it really that surprising that the police try to fob off financial crimes, which they don’t really understand, when they haven’t even got enough resources to prosecute known paedophiles who download illegal images of children or run child prostitution rackets?

Most financial crimes lead to nothing because solicitors charge a fortune, and that’s not particularly helpful to people who are already suffering financially! I rarely hear stories of money being recovered via civil litigation in these circumstances anyway, probably because the businesses owing the money tend to go into liquidation leaving the unscrupulous owners of those businesses to enjoy the protection of limited liability.

However, my frustration turned to inspiration in 2010 when I learned of the crime “Fraud By Abuse of Position”, a new law created in 2007.

Also, did you know that if a judge considers a private criminal prosecution to be justifiable that Counsels fees and investigation costs (i.e. the barristers fees and disbursements) are paid for by the state, regardless of whether the accused is found to be innocent or guilty at a trial by Jury? To protect both his client and his own reputation the barrister must, of course, be confident that there is a case to be answered. There is no requirement for Police or CPS involvement in a Private Prosecution. In fact, Private Prosecutions are as old as law itself and pre-date both the CPS and the Police.

I bided my time until I came across somebody I knew well who had a good enough case to package up and refer to a criminal barrister. Within days of him issuing a summons the wayward letting agent paid the landlord back all the money he had taken, as well as costs including the legal fees of the barrister, on the understanding that charges would be dropped. This was agreed in the best interests of public funds.

The problem was that I couldn’t publicise this great news, because that was the basis upon which the deal that was made, but I knew I was onto something very useful, not just for landlords and tenants but for any business which has been a victim of financial crime.

Other example cases might include:-

  • Rogue letting agents who have stolen clients money
  • Builders taking money for materials but vanishing without trace before doing the job.
  • Copyright theft on behalf of record producers.
  • Assisting Insolvency Practitioners.
  • Financial Services Network collapses, e.g. Directors misappropriating funds received from mortgage lenders and insurers leaving brokers out of pocket.
  • Call Centres hacked and telephone lines diverted to premium rate numbers running up massive bills.

Important note: if you drop charges made after a barrister has been appointed to initiate a private prosecution, then Counsels fees and costs incurred to that point will become payable by you. Therefore, it is imperative that you consider this if you are offered a settlement deal.

Form not found.


Share This Article

Comments

  • Member Since January 2011 - Comments: 12221 - Articles: 1430

    12:18 PM, 13th November 2014, About 12 years ago

    New website now launched in association with Cotswold Barristers – see below or >>> http://privateprosecutions.org/

  • Comments: 17

    6:25 PM, 19th November 2014, About 12 years ago

    This seems like a fantastic service.

    I wanted to ask if there was any scope for using this service to bring a private prosecution under S 1 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

    Under this section, it’s a criminal offence for an agent not to give out the landlords contact details upon request. The issue with this type of crime is that the police are not interested, the local authority normally doesn’t have time to deal with it and the tenant does not normally know how to prosecute the agent via the magistrates court.

    The situation I have in mind is one where the tenancy has ended (so the tenant cannot withhold rent under S48 Landlord and Tenant Act 1987) but the tenant needs to know the landlords name and address to bring a claim (disrepair, illegal eviction, deposit etc.).

  • Member Since January 2011 - Comments: 12221 - Articles: 1430

    7:22 PM, 19th November 2014, About 12 years ago

    Reply to the comment left by “George ” at “19/11/2014 – 18:25“:

    Hi George

    It would be far less stressful and much more economical to obtain the landlords details via HM Landlord Registry, it costs £3 and takes just a few minutes. Link >>> https://www.gov.uk/search-property-information-land-registry

    I doubt that a barrister would be interested in prosecuting on that basis alone because it would not be seen to be in the interests of public funds. However, where there is a genuine case of illegal eviction and an associated claim, that could be a very different matter.

    I have invited Mark Smith (Barrister-At-Law) to comment.
    .

  • Comments: 17

    1:55 PM, 20th November 2014, About 12 years ago

    Reply to the comment left by “Mark Alexander” at “19/11/2014 – 19:22“:

    Hi Mark

    Thanks so much for your response. I totally understand what you mean about this potentially not being in the best interest of public funds. Many thanks for inviting Mark Smith to comment. It would be great to get a barristers opinion, though I suspect that he may agree with you.

    In regard to Land Registry checks, one issue that is common to come across is the landlord’s address is often simply given as the owned property (which doesn’t get you very far!).

    Even where a different address is given, you can find yourself running checks on that property only to find a different address is given once more. You can repeat this process and end up with many, many addresses but no confirmation that the landlord is at any of these addresses anymore. The scatter gun approach of then writing to every address rarely gives results.

    Let’s also not forget about unregistered land (although this is rare these days).

    I also wanted to apologise to the OP. My comments are quite off topic and it’s not my intention to hijack this thread. Sorry!

Have Your Say

Every day, landlords who want to influence policy and share real-world experience add their voice here. Your perspective helps keep the debate balanced.

Not a member yet? Join In Seconds


Login with

or