This article is from the source 'independent' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/pyramid-scheme-prosecution-cost-taxpayers-14-million-10499980.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Pyramid scheme prosecution cost taxpayers £1.4 million Pyramid scheme prosecution cost taxpayers £1.4 million
(4 months later)
Prosecuting 11 women who operated and promoted a £21 million pyramid scheme cost taxpayers at least £1.4 million - but those convicted paid back as little as £1 each.Prosecuting 11 women who operated and promoted a £21 million pyramid scheme cost taxpayers at least £1.4 million - but those convicted paid back as little as £1 each.
The get-rich-quick con, named Give and Take (G&T), fleeced at least 10,000 people as it spread across the country between May 2008 and April 2009.The get-rich-quick con, named Give and Take (G&T), fleeced at least 10,000 people as it spread across the country between May 2008 and April 2009.
Bristol Crown Court heard victims were encouraged to “beg, borrow or steal” to take part in the scam, which promised £23,000 for each £3,000 investment if a player recruited two friends.Bristol Crown Court heard victims were encouraged to “beg, borrow or steal” to take part in the scam, which promised £23,000 for each £3,000 investment if a player recruited two friends.
G&T committee members pocketed up to £92,000 each, while up to 88% of their victims lost between £3,000 and £15,000.G&T committee members pocketed up to £92,000 each, while up to 88% of their victims lost between £3,000 and £15,000.
The scheme generated £21 million before it was closed down, with the money paid to winners, lost on charts that never reached fruition, or donated to charity.The scheme generated £21 million before it was closed down, with the money paid to winners, lost on charts that never reached fruition, or donated to charity.
The 11 women from the Bristol and Weston-super-Mare areas became the first peopl in the UK to be prosecuted for such a scheme under legislation from the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Act 2008.The 11 women from the Bristol and Weston-super-Mare areas became the first peopl in the UK to be prosecuted for such a scheme under legislation from the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Act 2008.
Six of the group, convicted of operating and promoting the scheme, paid back a total of £535,454 in confiscation orders and prosecution costs.Six of the group, convicted of operating and promoting the scheme, paid back a total of £535,454 in confiscation orders and prosecution costs.
One woman, who promoted the scheme, paid back £20,143, but two others were ordered to hand over just £1 as they had no realisable assets.One woman, who promoted the scheme, paid back £20,143, but two others were ordered to hand over just £1 as they had no realisable assets.
Figures released following a Freedom of Information request by the Press Association showed it cost “not less” than £1,465,000 for the prosecution.Figures released following a Freedom of Information request by the Press Association showed it cost “not less” than £1,465,000 for the prosecution.
This figure does not include defence costs, legal aid costs, or the costs of the courts hosting the trial and related hearings between December 2009 to July 2015.This figure does not include defence costs, legal aid costs, or the costs of the courts hosting the trial and related hearings between December 2009 to July 2015.
A spokeswoman for the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said there was a “strong public interest” in bringing the case to act as a deterrent, warn the public and achieve justice for victims.A spokeswoman for the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said there was a “strong public interest” in bringing the case to act as a deterrent, warn the public and achieve justice for victims.
“Investigating and prosecuting complex economic cases of this kind are invariably costly, often taking a significant time to investigate fully and resulting in lengthy trials,” she said.“Investigating and prosecuting complex economic cases of this kind are invariably costly, often taking a significant time to investigate fully and resulting in lengthy trials,” she said.
“In particular, they will typically involve sifting through millions of physical and electronic documents, complicated money tracing exercises and interviewing of a large number of potential witnesses.“In particular, they will typically involve sifting through millions of physical and electronic documents, complicated money tracing exercises and interviewing of a large number of potential witnesses.
”All this calls for a team of staff working full-time, including expert staff, and the advice of specialist counsel.”All this calls for a team of staff working full-time, including expert staff, and the advice of specialist counsel.
“The costs associated with this particular case are in no way unusual or unexpected for a case of this kind.”“The costs associated with this particular case are in no way unusual or unexpected for a case of this kind.”
Judge Mark Horton ordered the defendants to pay back individual amounts following a Proceeds of Crime hearing at Bristol Crown Court in July.Judge Mark Horton ordered the defendants to pay back individual amounts following a Proceeds of Crime hearing at Bristol Crown Court in July.
Chairwoman Laura Fox, 70, was ordered to pay £156,000, treasurer Jennifer Smith-Hayes, 69, £111,912, and secretary Susan Crane, 69, £81,162.Chairwoman Laura Fox, 70, was ordered to pay £156,000, treasurer Jennifer Smith-Hayes, 69, £111,912, and secretary Susan Crane, 69, £81,162.
Sally Phillips (left) Tracey Laurence and Rhalina Yuill (right) arriving at Bristol Magistrates court Fox, of East Harptree, Smith-Hayes, of Bishopsworth and Chalmers, of Weston-super-Mare, were sentenced to nine months imprisonment after being convicted of operating and promoting the scheme following a trial in 2012. Fox, of East Harptree, Smith-Hayes, of Bishopsworth and Chalmers, of Weston-super-Mare, were sentenced to nine months imprisonment after being convicted of operating and promoting the scheme following a trial in 2012.
Games co-ordinator Hazel Cameron, 55, paid £65,012, charts co-ordinator Mary Nash, 65, £53,362 and Carol Chalmers, 69, £47,862.Games co-ordinator Hazel Cameron, 55, paid £65,012, charts co-ordinator Mary Nash, 65, £53,362 and Carol Chalmers, 69, £47,862.
Cameron, of Chew Stoke, was handed a six-month sentence suspended for two years after admitting operating and promoting the scheme.Cameron, of Chew Stoke, was handed a six-month sentence suspended for two years after admitting operating and promoting the scheme.
Nash and Crane, both of Broadleas, Bristol, were jailed for six months in October 2014 after admitting the same charge.Nash and Crane, both of Broadleas, Bristol, were jailed for six months in October 2014 after admitting the same charge.
In 2012, Sally Philips, 35, of Hengrove, Jane Smith, 51, of Bishopsworth, and Rita Lomas, 50, of Whitchurch, received suspended sentences in 2012 after they admitted promoting the scheme.In 2012, Sally Philips, 35, of Hengrove, Jane Smith, 51, of Bishopsworth, and Rita Lomas, 50, of Whitchurch, received suspended sentences in 2012 after they admitted promoting the scheme.
Bristol Crown Court heard Lomas' benefit was agreed at £40,455.93 but she had no realisable assets, along with Philips.Bristol Crown Court heard Lomas' benefit was agreed at £40,455.93 but she had no realisable assets, along with Philips.
Both were ordered to pay £1.Both were ordered to pay £1.
Smith benefited £51,949 from the scheme but only had assets of £20,143, which she paid back.Smith benefited £51,949 from the scheme but only had assets of £20,143, which she paid back.
Speaking after the confiscations, Stephen Blake, senior director responsible for criminal enforcement at the CMA, urged members of the public to avoid such schemes.Speaking after the confiscations, Stephen Blake, senior director responsible for criminal enforcement at the CMA, urged members of the public to avoid such schemes.
“These defendants operated a sophisticated pyramid promotional scheme with the aim of making money at the expense of others,” he added.“These defendants operated a sophisticated pyramid promotional scheme with the aim of making money at the expense of others,” he added.