A Confiscation Order issued at the Crown Court under the Proceeds Of Crime Act 2002 (‘POCA’) will take account of several issues including the ‘Benefit Figure’ and the ‘Available Amount’.

In articles posted to this website on 2 January and 5 August 2020, both of these aspects were considered.

For further details please follow these links:

An interesting question affecting the determination of the amount of funds available to a defendant to discharge his debt was recently considered by the Court of Appeal in R v Lowther [2020] EWCA Crim 1387.

The Court had to decide whether the property disposal costs were allowable against the Benefit Figure, thereby reducing the amount payable by the defendant, or whether those costs reduced the Available Amount for reduction of the debt, thereby not reducing the debt calculated against the defendant.

Amandeep Murria of Kangs Solicitors comments on the circumstances and outcome of the Appeal Court’s decision.

The Confiscation Team at Kangs Solicitors is nationally recognised for its experience in assisting clients involved in all aspects of POCA. 

We are recognised by the leading law directories, the Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners, for our work in relation to confiscation, restraint and cash seizure work.

We appreciate any client seeking to vary or challenge a confiscation, restraint or cash seizure order requires immediate specialist legal advice and assistance.

For an initial no obligation consultation, please telephone our team of lawyers at any of our offices detailed below:

R v Lowther [2020] EWCA Crim 1387 | Kangs POCA Solicitors

  • The defendant and his brothers, following conviction at Nottingham Crown Court for offences involving Blackmail, Money Laundering and Perverting the Course of Justice were made subject to Confiscation Proceedings under POCA in May 2019.
  • Appeals against the Confiscation Orders were refused in respect of all the Grounds of Appeal save for that which affected the manner in which the costs of selling the property were handled.
  • The defendants maintained that such costs ought to be deducted from the value attached to property, thereby reducing the Benefit Amount, being the sum by which the defendants had benefited from the criminal activity.
  • Having considered the various contentions, the Court of Appeal ordered that the costs incurred in selling property should be deducted from the Available Amount and not the Benefit Figure with the result that the value of the proceeds of crime enjoyed by the defendants was not depleted by the sale costs.

How Can We Help? | Kangs National POCA Solicitors

If you are subject to a Confiscation Order and are concerned that you may not be able to meet your obligations as the result of the value of your assets being inadequate, please feel free to contact the team at Kangs Solicitors which has a wealth of experience in all aspects of POCA proceedings.

We are here to assist and happy to provide an initial no obligation consultation at our offices in London, Birmingham and Manchester or by telephone/video conferencing.

Hamraj Kang
07976 258171 | 020 7936 6396 | 0121 449 9888

John Veale
0121 449 9888 | 020 7936 6396