• Welcome to DOSBODS

    Please consider creating a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

Sign in to follow this  
One percent

Unexplained wealth

Recommended Posts

This is an interesting one

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/03/bankers-wife-may-lose-property-worth-millions-after-uk-court-ruling

The wife of a foreign banker faces losing UK property worth millions of pounds unless she can explain the source of her wealth, following a judgment at the high court.

The woman, referred to in the judgment as “Mrs A” and cannot be named for legal reasons, was the subject of the UK’s first unexplained wealth orderearlier this year following an application by the National Crime Agency.

Counsel for the NCA described the luxury lifestyle of Mrs A, who spent £16m at Harrods over 10 years, at a hearing before the high court in July. Her husband’s net worth was reported to be $72m.

The UWO was issued in respect of a property bought in 2009 for £11.5m via a company in the British Virgin Islands. A £7.5m mortgage was also taken out against the property from Barclays Suisse.

In 2015, while applying for indefinite leave to remain in the UK, Mrs A told the Home Office that she was the beneficial owner of the BVI company. However, regulators in the Caribbean tax haven told NCA investigators that the company’s true owner was Mrs A’s husband, Mr A, who also cannot be named for legal reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, One percent said:

This is an interesting one

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/03/bankers-wife-may-lose-property-worth-millions-after-uk-court-ruling

The wife of a foreign banker faces losing UK property worth millions of pounds unless she can explain the source of her wealth, following a judgment at the high court.

The woman, referred to in the judgment as “Mrs A” and cannot be named for legal reasons, was the subject of the UK’s first unexplained wealth orderearlier this year following an application by the National Crime Agency.

Counsel for the NCA described the luxury lifestyle of Mrs A, who spent £16m at Harrods over 10 years, at a hearing before the high court in July. Her husband’s net worth was reported to be $72m.

The UWO was issued in respect of a property bought in 2009 for £11.5m via a company in the British Virgin Islands. A £7.5m mortgage was also taken out against the property from Barclays Suisse.

In 2015, while applying for indefinite leave to remain in the UK, Mrs A told the Home Office that she was the beneficial owner of the BVI company. However, regulators in the Caribbean tax haven told NCA investigators that the company’s true owner was Mrs A’s husband, Mr A, who also cannot be named for legal reasons.

Reckon they’ve just knocked billions off the value of real estate in London and put a few more agents out of work. (Shame! 9_9 )

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, One percent said:

This is an interesting one

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/03/bankers-wife-may-lose-property-worth-millions-after-uk-court-ruling

The wife of a foreign banker faces losing UK property worth millions of pounds unless she can explain the source of her wealth, following a judgment at the high court.

The woman, referred to in the judgment as “Mrs A” and cannot be named for legal reasons, was the subject of the UK’s first unexplained wealth orderearlier this year following an application by the National Crime Agency.

Counsel for the NCA described the luxury lifestyle of Mrs A, who spent £16m at Harrods over 10 years, at a hearing before the high court in July. Her husband’s net worth was reported to be $72m.

The UWO was issued in respect of a property bought in 2009 for £11.5m via a company in the British Virgin Islands. A £7.5m mortgage was also taken out against the property from Barclays Suisse.

In 2015, while applying for indefinite leave to remain in the UK, Mrs A told the Home Office that she was the beneficial owner of the BVI company. However, regulators in the Caribbean tax haven told NCA investigators that the company’s true owner was Mrs A’s husband, Mr A, who also cannot be named for legal reasons.

Guilty until proven innocent, again. Goodbye free country, hello police state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hail the Tripod said:

Guilty until proven innocent, again. Goodbye free country, hello police state.

will be cases like this that help to enforce a cashless society in a couple of decades

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the time to have been sorting this out was 2009, not now.  

[I suppose it could be argued 'better late than never' -- but this should go alongside deep questioning of those in the relevant positions of authority in previous years as to why checks were so lax back then, and also some official indication as to how big the problem actually is.  I'd also support the restriction to sales of property to offshore institutions (if at all) to those that have been vetted as being open -- definitely not the likes of BVI that are notoriously closed]

2 minutes ago, stokiescum said:

will be cases like this that help to enforce a cashless society in a couple of decades

Sure -- and we'll all be investigated to the (n+1)th degree about the provenance of our wealth, while the truly wealthy continue to do as they please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Hail the Tripod said:

Guilty until proven innocent, again. Goodbye free country, hello police state.

I dunno, seems she's been given plenty of chance to prove where the funds came from and hasn't been able to satisfy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Hail the Tripod said:

Guilty until proven innocent, again. Goodbye free country, hello police state.

Attention citizen we have detected wrongthink. For your safety please enter the rightthink assistance pod. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cosmic Apple said:

I dunno, seems she's been given plenty of chance to prove where the funds came from and hasn't been able to satisfy?

she shouldn't have to, the state has had plenty of time to gather evidence of wrong doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dgul said:

the time to have been sorting this out was 2009, not now.  

[I suppose it could be argued 'better late than never' -- but this should go alongside deep questioning of those in the relevant positions of authority in previous years as to why checks were so lax back then, and also some official indication as to how big the problem actually is.  I'd also support the restriction to sales of property to offshore institutions (if at all) to those that have been vetted as being open -- definitely not the likes of BVI that are notoriously closed]

Sure -- and we'll all be investigated to the (n+1)th degree about the provenance of our wealth, while the truly wealthy continue to do as they please.

not only that it will be about tax returns in the future etc,working for cash in hand whilst on benis etc will be harder in the future

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Libspero said:

Agree the responsibility should be for the law to prove guilt..

More importantly..  where is the money going once it's confiscated?

 

It is the Government who will get your money. Sure I wish our security services would take on Russian and Saudi banksters, but they don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unexplained ?

Nobody has explained why arriving from Pakistan and your children can become Home Secretary or Mayor of London is to be celebrated ?

Nobody has explained why encouraging Russians to invest in London property then make a political move to seize their assets by the state, isn't simply theft ?

http://time.com/5383100/bill-browder-john-mccain-magnitsky-act/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Hail the Tripod said:

Guilty until proven innocent, again. Goodbye free country, hello police state.

I have no sympathy for the women but have to agree. Thin end of the wedge? When does the confiscation of property from the plebs start?

Would the UK benefit more from this or from letting her continue to spend millions in Harrods every year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Hail the Tripod said:

Guilty until proven innocent, again. Goodbye free country, hello police state.

It is a civil law matter being decided in the High Court so guilt or innocence don't come into it. 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/circular-0032018-criminal-finances-act-unexplained-wealth-orders/circular-0032018-unexplained-wealth-orders

HMRC can actually raise tax assessments based purely on lifestyle investigations using notional income figures derived from analysis of an individuals spending behaviour not matching declared income or debt. This why money has to be laundered (i.e given some believable source). This is not new either as they were doing it in the 1980s when I worked for the Inland Revenue. Incidentally, earnings from illegal and immoral activity are also taxable under UK law.

 

Edited by Virgil Caine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stokiescum said:

will be cases like this that help to enforce a cashless society in a couple of decades

They are foreign nationals. I think the country has a right to know. FWIW, I don’t think that foreigners should be able to buy property in the uk especially as there is a shortage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, One percent said:

They are foreign nationals. I think the country has a right to know. FWIW, I don’t think that foreigners should be able to buy property in the uk especially as there is a shortage

It's the rule in many countries, unless you give them a bit of a bung of course. :Old:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, One percent said:

They are foreign nationals. I think the country has a right to know. FWIW, I don’t think that foreigners should be able to buy property in the uk especially as there is a shortage

I would suspect that this is about laundering money from suspected criminal activity rather than simply about rich foreigners buying UK property. The whole point of the legislation is to target criminals using the civil law where guilt and innocence don't exist and judgement is based on reasonable probability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For centuries in the UK - and most countries - the King could take your property off you and give it to someone else.  No questions.

This seems to at least have a process around it to allow a legal source of funds to be provided.  It's probably the only way, in a global world with secrecy laws in many countries, to take money off the corrupt.

That said, as usual, the real corrupt bastards probably won't be targetted.  Thinking of certain MP's here with very shady histories but lots and lots of money.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, One percent said:

They are foreign nationals. I think the country has a right to know. FWIW, I don’t think that foreigners should be able to buy property in the uk especially as there is a shortage

Behave. Like Thailand, you mean? There's no need to start copying 3rd world  countries.

There's only a shortage because there's 10-15 million more people than there were 25 years back and nothing much has been built, or nothing much good at any rate. If supply was greater, prices would be lower.

I suppose Brit women could start targeting foreign men and getting them to buy land/houses for them like the Thai women do. But they might have to up their game a bit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.