Issue - meetings

The Executive Board Sub-Committee considered the attached report.

RECOMMENDED: That

(i)      the Scheme of Delegation be amended to show the Borough Solicitor as the delegated person for instituting proceeds for the Council, with Trading Standard Officers/Consumer Protection Officers delegated as investigating officers;

(ii)     in agreeing to the above, it be noted that the Council would be committing to undertake confiscation cases at Crown Court in Consumer Protection Prosecutions where it can be shown that assets are available for confiscation; and

(iii)    a financial investigator, to act on a chargeable consultative basis for other local authority services requiring the use of an accredited financial investigator in appropriate cases, be permitted.

The Executive Board Sub-Committee had considered a report seeking support for the use of the full “confiscation regime” and “offences” under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 by the Consumer Protection Service.

RESOLVED: That

(1)               the scheme of delegation be amended to show the Borough Solicitor as the delegated person for instituting proceeds for the Council, with Trading Standard Officers/Consumer Protection Offices delegated as investigating officers;

(2)               in agreeing to the above, it be noted that the Council would be committing to undertake confiscation cases at Crown Court in Consumer Protection Prosecutions where it can be shown that assets are available for confiscation; and

(3)       a financial investigator, to act on a chargeable consultative basis for other local authority services requiring the use of an accredited financial investigator in appropriate cases, be permitted.

            The Sub-Committee considered a report on the use of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 by the Consumer Protection Service. The Act was introduced by the Government because it recognised that leaving illicitly obtained assets in the hands of criminals was damaging to society.

            In recent years, there had been concern with the Trading Standards profession that courts often imposed low financial penalties on defendants in Trading Standards prosecutions.            To address this concern, some Consumer Protection/Trading Standards Services had worked in partnership with the Asset Recovery Agency to pursue asset recovery in appropriate cases.

            The Local Authority Co-Ordinators of Regulatory Services (LACORS) had recognised that this was a powerful enforcement tool that supported the normal prosecution process, but was aware that the Asset Recovery Agency, the Regional Asset Recovery Teams and Police Forces could not provide all the support that Trading Standards would need. It had therefore secured funding from the Home Office for the training of a number of Trading Standards Officers in each region as accredited financial investigators under Parts 2 and 8 of Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

            Halton’s Consumer Protection Service had an officer fully trained and accredited under the above provisions of the POCA, one of only 27 officers in Local Government trained to undertake this work. The officer was capable of using the provisions of the Act in certain criminal investigations where the person under investigation had benefited by over £5,000 from their criminal conduct.

            An analysis of criminal investigations undertaken by the Consumer Protection Service had revealed that since the introduction of this legislation, 13 local cases could have utilised the confiscation regime under the Act. Currently, there were four cases under investigation that would merit financial investigation, one of which represented potential criminally acquired assets in excess of £200,000. However, LACoRS always intended that those local authority financial investigators trained in this way would offer their services within the region, and that requirement could be delivered via the Council permitting this officer to act for other local authority services on a chargeable, consultancy basis.

            It was reported that the Home Office had developed a Recovered Asset Incentivisation Fund (RAIF) which allowed a percentage of confiscated assets to be returned to the Agency undertaking the criminal investigation and/or confiscation work. However, the Home Office had ring-fenced the use of what it called Incentive Monies and had advised that it would monitor the use of such monies to assess issues of propriety and regularity.

            RESOLVED: That

(1)               the use of the full ‘confiscation regime’  and ‘offences’ under the

           Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 by the Consumer Protection Service,

           be agreed; and

(2)               Council be requested to agree the necessary Scheme of Delegation

           changes:

      (i) the Borough Solicitor should be the delegated person for instituting proceeds for the Council, whilst Trading Standard Officers/Consumer Protection Officers should be delegated as       investigating officers;

            (ii) in agreeing to the above, the Council would be committing to             undertake confiscation cases at Crown Court in Consumer Protection             Prosecutions where  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62