A crown court judge has set a timetable for a proceeds of crime hearing to recover funds from two brothers who were convicted for various fraud offences earlier this year in connection to the failed peer to peer lending platform Collateral.
Collateral (UK) Limited was a finance company which facilitated investments crowdfunded by members of the public. The firm and two related companies entered administration in April 2018.
The two defendants, Andrew Currie, 58, and Peter Currie, 59, both denied two charges under the Fraud Act 2006 and one charge under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 in this criminal prosecution brought by the Financial Conduct Authority.
For further information about the case, and to see our reporting of every day of the trial please visit our main information page.
Please donate to the Cheese Fund to support crowd-funded journalism of the P2P sector.
Reporting by Daniel Cloake.
The first count of fraud alleged they dishonestly made a false representation to investors and potential investors that the company Collateral UK Limited was authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.
Peter Currie was found GUILTY
Andrew Currie was found NOT GUILTY
The second count of fraud claimed the Curries abused their positions, in which they were expected to safeguard, and not act against, the financial interests of the company by transferring £275,000 from Collateral to Auri Developments Ltd.
Peter Currie was found GUILTY
Andrew Currie was found GUILTY
The third charge related to converting criminal property, suggesting the Curries converted credits to the total value of £372,299.52 to bank accounts owned by Andrew Currie, knowing or suspecting it to be proceeds of crime, namely fraud by misrepresentation.
Peter Currie was found GUILTY
Andrew Currie was found GUILTY
The December Hearing
The background for the matter was revealed in a press release issued shortly after the sentencing hearing. Steve Smart, Joint Executive Director of Enforcement & Market Oversight said:
“Peter Currie fraudulently amended the Register to entice investors in, and together with Andrew, stole client money once they knew the game was up.
Unfortunately, the investors will now be left to pick up the tab for the loans that have turned bad.
The FCA has begun confiscation proceedings to recover the financial benefit obtained by the defendants, as well as compensation proceedings to recover investor funds. “
At this six-minute-hearing before His Honour Judge Griffith the court was told there had been a flurry of e-mail correspondence between the parties over a request by the FCA to extend the date for service of a so-called section 16 application.
According to Olliers Solicitors a section 16 application is served with a statement from “an accredited Financial Investigator who will set out what he or she believes to be the criminal ‘benefit’ arising from a defendant’s criminality following conviction and will go on to state what the known available amount of assets is“.
Ashley Hendron, the barrister representing Peter Currie, confirmed that is was his team that had objected to the 5-week-extension for service of this document. He explained that whilst he had read the e-mails he had “asked for clarification and it hasn’t been forthcoming”.
Mr Hendron added that the “FCA have had a number of months to make these enquiries” and there was “concern about the amount of time it has taken“.
We were told it was the view of Peter Currie that the s16 evidence gathered so far should be served now with any additional evidence served at a later date. Mr Hendron candidly admitted though that “one can see the value for both defendants in replying to the complete s16“.
The comments were rejected by Eloise Emanuel, appearing for the FCA, who had earlier said that the authority was waiting for “further material to be translated“. The mouseinthecourt understands Peter Currie has interests in Spain. Ms Emanuel explained that it was “not prejudicial for either defendant for the complete section 16 to be served in January“.
This view was shared by the judge who ruled that the new timetable should be adopted.
The timetable is as follows:
The FCA to serve their application by 15th January 2024
The defendants to reply by 11th March 2024
The FCA to reply by 6th May 2024
A hearing to decide the application was listed for 22nd May 2024. 5th – 7th November 2024
Case details:
Courtroom 11 Southwark Crown Court
Before His Honour Judge Griffith
7th December 2023
Case number: T20220056
CURRIE Andrew
CURRIE Peter
The Financial Conduct Authority were represented by barrister Eloise Emanuel.
Peter Currie was represented by barrister Ashley Hendron.
Andrew Currie was represented by barrister Ben Rowe.
The defendants did not attend the hearing.
The work on this site is protected by copyright laws and treaties around the world. All such rights are reserved.
You may print off one copy, and may download extracts, of any page(s) from our site for your personal use and you may draw the attention of others within your organisation to content posted on our site.
You must not modify the paper or digital copies of any materials you have printed off or downloaded in any way, and you must not use any illustrations, photographs, video or audio sequences or any graphics separately from any accompanying text.
Our status (and that of any identified contributors) as the authors of content on our site must always be acknowledged.
You must not use any part of the content on our site for commercial purposes without obtaining a licence to do so from us or our licensors.
Mouse in the Court 