News & Events

News & Events

Back To Articles

Regulatory law and corporate crime: mitigating the damage from prosecution

A recent prosecution case, in which our client’s custodial sentence was reduced to a suspended sentence order, highlights why it’s essential to seek legal advice at an early stage in any investigation by public bodies

Our specialist team recently defended a qualified electrician who had been charged by Trading Standards as the director of a limited company with four matters of Fraudulent Trading under s993 of the Companies Act and four breaches of the Consumer Protection Unfair Trading Regulations.

Case background

The Prosecution alleged that our client had operated their company in a misleading, fraudulent, and professionally irresponsible manner for their own gain. Our client was alleged to have defrauded three landlords by representing that they would produce Electrical Installation Condition Reports, taking money up front, and then failing to provide either the reports or a refund. It was also alleged that they misrepresented themselves as being accredited and registered under the “competent person scheme.”

We represented our client in the Magistrates’ Court and, on our advice on the legal facts, the client pleaded guilty to the matters, along with the company, which had also been charged with four matters under the Consumer Protection Unfair Trading Regulations.

Given the seriousness of the case, it was committed for sentence to the Crown Court; we litigated the proceedings at the Crown Court on our client’s behalf. We were able to advise upon – and draw out – the substantial points, which our client needed to present to the Crown Court in order to mitigate the offences and avoid imprisonment.

Throughout the process, we advised our client on all aspects of presenting their case and damage limitation.  Our team was able to persuade the Crown Court that a suspended sentence order was suitable in our client’s circumstances; they received a custodial sentence of 12 months, suspended for 18 months, with the requirement to work with the probation service to complete unpaid work and rehabilitation days. The complainants are to be compensated.  The company was also ordered to pay a financial penalty.


This is yet another example of why securing specialist legal advice early in an investigation by any public body is essential. In this case, our client was fortunate in avoiding what the Judge said would have been two years’ immediate custody.

The stark reality is that business owners often do not anticipate, or even consider, that regulatory matters are increasingly being prosecuted by different public bodies through the criminal courts where loss of liberty can be a real outcome.

For help and advice in this area, or any other aspect regulatory law and/or Corporate Crime affecting you and your business, please get in touch with Elizabeth Rowley on our contact our team on (01482) 325242

Contact Us

Let's keep in touch!

To receive regular updates such as newsletters, legal updates and invitations to upcoming events please fill in your details below.

I agree that Andrew Jackson Solicitors LLP will retain my details on its database, and may sometimes use the details in accordance with its Privacy Notice to send marketing materials to me.

    Type your search term above

    Please enter a search term above and we'll show you any matching pages.

    Call us

    Hull+44 (0)1482 325 242

    York+44 (0)1904 275 250

    Grimsby+44 (0)1472 267 770

    Scarborough+44 (0)1723 882 500

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on the Andrew Jackson Solicitors LLP website. However, you can change your cookie preferences at any time through your browser settings. Click here to view our cookies policy.