A policeman, Nigel Muglur, was imprisoned for conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office, misconduct in a public office, money laundering and unauthorised access to a computer. Now, the Crown Prosecution Service are instigating Confiscation Proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act (2002) in an attempt to recover the benefit obtained from his criminal conduct.
Nigel Muglur worked with his wife, who was also part of Lancashire Constabulary, to sell police information concerning road traffic crash victims to claims companies. It was alleged that they profited more that £360,000 across a seven year period, splurging the money on extravagant holidays and living beyond their co-worker’s means.
The Constabulary received a series of complaints concerning unsolicited called from claims companies which led them to investigate the Muglurs. Nicola Muglur was prosecuted for obtaining personal data which conflicts with The Data Protection Act (1998). Both were dismissed from the Constabulary after the disciplinary tribunal found the offences to be proven. Mr Muglur also set up his own company named the Personal Injury Company which helped him manage his scheme. It is estimated that he was taking in more than £50,000 per annum.
Should any defendant satisfy the criteria set out in section 75(2) of POCA (2002) then they are automatically deemed to have a ‘criminal lifestyle’. In those circumstances, certain assumptions (as detailed in section 10 of the Act) can be used to try and establish the defendant’s overall general criminal conduct.
Where a defendant does not satisfy the criteria for a ‘criminal lifestyle’ the court must determine whether he has benefited from the offence or offences in which he was charged known as his ‘particular criminal conduct’.
In determining the sum any defendant has to pay back, the court will also assess the Defendant’s available amount which comprises of all his available assets including whether he holds any ‘hidden assets’ or he has made any ‘tainted gifts’ as described by the legislation.
Should a Confiscation Order be made against Mr Muglur in the future, a default sentence will also be attached and may be activated should he fail to satisfy the order within the permitted time period set by the court.
Authors, Laurence Grant and Simon Connolly of Duncan Lewis’ Crime department are specialists in confiscation proceedings, with particular aptitude in high value orders where the Prosecution seeks multi million pound benefit figures.
Duncan Lewis Crime Solicitors
Although these proceedings can seem very overwhelming and the legislation is no doubt very draconian in nature, with thorough and meticulous preparation, it is possible to successfully challenge the purported benefit and available amount figures.
Duncan Lewis’ Crime department is a Band 1 ranked department in Chambers & Partners 2017/18 and we have extensive experience and expertise in acting for clients who are subject to such proceedings.
Please contact our specialist Confiscation and Restraints team on 0333 772 0409 should you wish to discuss any matters.