Ponzi Scheme Prosecutions In Uk Law
📚 What Is a Ponzi Scheme?
A Ponzi scheme is a form of investment fraud where returns to earlier investors are paid using the capital of newer investors, rather than legitimate profits. The scheme eventually collapses when the operator can no longer attract new funds.
⚖️ Legal Framework for Ponzi Schemes in the UK
Ponzi schemes violate several areas of UK law:
| Law / Act | Relevance |
|---|---|
| Fraud Act 2006 | Particularly sections 1 and 2: fraud by false representation, failure to disclose information. |
| Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA) | Operating a financial service or investment scheme without FCA authorisation is a criminal offence. |
| Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA) | Used to confiscate assets gained through fraudulent schemes. |
| Companies Act 2006 | Used if companies are used to promote or facilitate fraud. |
| Common law | Conspiracy to defraud. |
🧑⚖️ Key Ponzi Scheme Prosecution Cases in UK Law
1. R v. Kautilya Nandan Prasad (2012)
Facts: Prasad ran a fake investment scheme, promising returns of up to 20% per month. He used new investor money to pay earlier ones and siphoned off large sums for personal use.
Charges: Fraud by false representation (Fraud Act 2006).
Outcome: Convicted and sentenced to 6 years in prison.
Significance:
Demonstrated how traditional Ponzi schemes operate under the guise of “investment clubs.”
Use of false documents and misleading guarantees triggered Fraud Act offences.
2. R v. Sandhu & Others (2008) – "The Vavasseur Case"
Facts: Sandhu orchestrated an international Ponzi scheme promising investment in foreign currency exchange. Over £40 million was collected from UK and overseas investors.
Legal Issue: Sandhu claimed he genuinely believed in the scheme’s viability.
Outcome: Convicted of conspiracy to defraud and sentenced to 6.5 years.
Significance:
The judge rejected any defence of ignorance when the structure clearly showed hallmarks of a Ponzi scheme.
Showed courts’ willingness to convict based on reckless disregard for investor protection.
3. R v. Alex Hope (2015)
Facts: Hope, a self-proclaimed FX trader, took over £5 million from investors, claiming he would trade on the foreign exchange market. Very little trading occurred; most of the money was spent on luxury items.
Charges: Fraud and operating a collective investment scheme without FCA authorisation.
Outcome: Sentenced to 7 years in prison.
Significance:
Combined fraud offences with FSMA breaches.
FCA involvement reinforced the requirement for regulatory approval for collective investment.
4. R v. James Bernie (2014)
Facts: Bernie operated a Ponzi-style scheme through various companies promising returns through real estate and overseas investments.
Charges: Fraud, conspiracy to defraud, and money laundering under POCA.
Outcome: Sentenced to 10 years imprisonment.
Significance:
Use of shell companies to launder and conceal funds.
POCA used to seize assets including luxury vehicles and properties.
5. R v. Thomas Scriven (2018)
Facts: Scriven ran a multi-million pound investment fraud, luring victims with fake returns from property and loan schemes. Investors were misled into thinking their capital was safe.
Charges: Multiple counts of fraud and false accounting.
Outcome: 9 years in prison and banned from serving as a company director for 15 years.
Significance:
Emphasised dishonest misrepresentations about financial returns.
Investors were elderly and vulnerable, aggravating sentencing.
6. R v. Freddy David (2018)
Facts: David, a financial adviser, operated an FCA-regulated business but used it to run a Ponzi scheme. He took £14.5 million from clients, using the money to pay back other investors and fund a lavish lifestyle.
Charges: Fraud by abuse of position, money laundering.
Outcome: Sentenced to 6 years.
Significance:
Unusual case where the fraudster was FCA-authorised.
Abuse of professional trust was a key aggravating factor.
💡 Legal Principles from These Cases
| Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Fraud by False Representation | Core offence in Ponzi schemes—misleading people about returns or investments. |
| Unauthorised Investment Activity (FSMA) | Offering financial services without FCA approval is a separate criminal offence. |
| Conspiracy to Defraud (Common Law) | Used when multiple people are involved in orchestrating the scheme. |
| POCA for Asset Recovery | Ensures that criminal profits are seized—homes, bank accounts, and luxury goods. |
| Director Disqualification Orders | Fraudulent directors face bans from managing companies for up to 15 years. |
🧾 Common Elements in UK Ponzi Prosecutions
Promises of High Returns – Often “guaranteed” with little or no risk.
Early Payouts to Build Trust – Funds from new investors used to pay old ones.
Lack of Genuine Investment Activity – Little to no actual trading or business.
Use of Complex Company Structures – Shell companies or overseas accounts.
Luxury Lifestyle Evidence – Used in sentencing as proof of dishonesty and motive.
✅ Summary
Ponzi schemes are aggressively prosecuted in the UK under a combination of criminal fraud statutes, regulatory law, and asset forfeiture provisions. The Fraud Act 2006, FSMA 2000, and POCA 2002 work together to not only punish offenders but also to dismantle the financial infrastructure of the fraud.
Courts take into account the scale of loss, number of victims, and personal enrichment in sentencing. Even those without formal financial training can be prosecuted if they knowingly or recklessly mislead investors.
RELATED Blog
0 comments