Claims brought under the POCA 2002 Cash Seizure provisions
A reason why proceedings commonly known as POCA 2002 cash seizure are considered so unjust, is that most people assume that in order for the authorities to deprive someone of his or her assets, they must first prove beyond reasonable doubt the fact that taking these things away is justified. As far as the seizure and retaining of cash is concerned, the law is shockingly more draconian than this. A client should seek a specialist solicitor where a large sum of money has been seized, or unexplained cash might become government cash at the stroke of a pen.
At Mary Monson Solicitors, we have been acting in cases involving cash seizure since the Proceeds of Crime Act came into force. We have a specialist Proceeds of Crime department and are leaders in the field. If you want to know the basics of how this area of law works, see the free guide below.
POCA 2002 Cash Seizure
Seizure is the process of ownership of funds being taken from individuals over to the state. These cases are civil proceedings and take place in the magistrates court. The authorities who are requesting seizure have to prove their case on a balance of probabilities. This means they must show that their case is ‘more probable than not‘, or ‘more likely than the other side’s position‘. There is an automatic right of appeal to the Crown Court, and in a Crown Court appeal the whole case will be heard again from the beginning.
What must be proved for the cash to be seized?
Cash may be seized if it is proved that a customs officer, police officer or a financial investigator has reasonable grounds to suspect that it is either ‘recoverable property‘ or it is ‘intended for use in unlawful conduct‘.
So what do these terms mean? Recoverable property is property obtained through unlawful conduct. This means doing anything illegal, including in foreign countries so long as that conduct is unlawful both in the UK and that foreign country. So property that could be subject to a claim under the POCA 2002 cash seizure rules could include, for example, money fairly, if not legally, made in the prostitution industry, or as a result of fraud.
The prosecution do not have to show that the unlawful conduct was of one particular kind if they can prove that it was one of a number of kinds, each of which would have been unlawful. However, even though there is no need to prove that someone committed a particular offence, the law suggests that it is necessary to specify the particular type of criminality relied upon. The minimum amount that the authorities can seize under this law is £1000.
The term ‘cash seizure‘ is slightly misleading because this area of the law also applies to bearer bonds and shares, bankers drafts, postal orders and cheques.
The money seized must be paid into an interest bearing account at the first reasonable opportunity. Note that often money is submitted for mass spectrometer analysis to see if it has an unusually high level of drug contamination. In this situation, it may not be paid into an account until the testing has taken place.
Time limits to be aware of
Following seizure of the cash an application must be made to the Magistrates Court within 48 hours (excluding holidays and weekends) to detain the cash for longer to allow for further enquiries.
The magistrates may order that the cash be further detained for an initial maximum period of 3months. This period may be further extended by a maximum of 3 months per application.
The total maximum allowed time for the case to happen from the initial detention of money is 2 years.
Under the POCA 2002 cash seizure rules, each time the authorities apply for extra time to detain the cash, they have to persuade the court that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that the cash has been obtained unlawfully. The only other way that they can successfully apply for continued detention of the cash is if they can convince the court that the property otherwise is intended to be used in unlawful conduct (i.e. as part of criminal financial activity), and that the delay is necessary to provide them time to investigate its origin or the criminal activity it was intended to finance.
In either scenario, the court may also extend the period if criminal proceedings are still being considered as a possibility or ongoing.
Early Release of Funds
Applications for early release of the cash may be made either by the person from whom the cash was seized or by owners of cash. This includes someone who claims that the cash was stolen from them by the person from whom it was seized. It is important to remember that the person seeking the early release will need to prove that the conditions for further detention do not apply.
If the court is satisfied on a balance of probabilities that the money is either recoverable property or intended for use in criminal conduct it will order that the money be forfeited.
In civil litigation costs normally follow the event. This means that the winner in a case should get his or her costs returned.
However, this is perhaps shockingly not now applied in most cases brought under the POCA 2002 cash seizure legislation. The courts have recently decided that since there is a public interest in such proceedings being brought (if they are brought on reasonable grounds and in good faith) the authorities should not be discouraged from making seizure applications through fear of having to pay costs. This means that costs are not usually awarded to the individual who successfully defends the case.
However, if the court is of the view that the application should never have been brought or continued with after explanations about the origin of the cash had been given, it will award costs against the applicant.
If the court is satisfied that the person form whom the cash was seized or the owner has suffered a loss and the circumstances are ‘exceptional‘, it may award that person compensation. This type of compensation award is, however, rare.