can you be arrested for fraud by false representation

[cilla1]

What is fraud by false representation?
And is it a serious charge? Please Help thanks

[Rollo]

Yes you can be arrested, and yes it is serious.

Fraud by false representation

(1) A person is in breach of this section if he�

(a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and
(b) intends, by making the representation�
(i) to make a gain for himself or another, or
(ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.
(2) A representation is false if�
(a) it is untrue or misleading, and
(b) the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.
(3) �Representation� means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of�
(a) the person making the representation, or
(b) any other person.
(4) A representation may be express or implied.
(5) For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention).

[paraffin]

It's not THAT serious:

On summary conviction (Mag. Ct) you could get fined or up to 1 year inside (6 months in N.I.).

Or a fine or up to 5 years inside (Crown Ct).

[Rollo]

That's not serious?

Anything where you might get a custodial sentence is serious in my book.

[squarebear]

A sentence of up to 5 years inside isn't serious? This guy must be a seasoned criminal.

[owenllewelyn]

fraud by false representation (otherwise known as misrepresentation), is a contract law term (although can be used in tort law also)

Cilla1 I obviously don't know what sort of fraud is involved here, but no custodial sentence usually arises because of a fraudulent misrepresentation, which has influenced someone to enter into a CONTRACT , when the other party knows that the information given is false.

See the case of Derry v Peek . Under the Misrepresentation Act 1967, the other party could rescind the contract, OR damages could be awarded in lieu of rescission.

[owenllewelyn]

i may be wrong, so you should seek proper legal advice

[paraffin]

squarebear:

I take it that you are aware of the laws of libel?

[Schutzengel]

Cilla. Is this about the mix up with two lamps?

[cilla1]

Hi all it was in a shop and the shop asistant nor the customer noticed, it all came out a week later when she returned to the store then they arrested her it was for less than 17 pounds.
She had returned an item and and was buying another item so the asistant put the money back onto her credit card for the return but she also gave her the money back in her hand including the change from the item she was buying.
She did not intend to fraud anyone but the police don't believe her and it has now gone to public prosacution.
Are the police not wasting more money in taking this further for that amount of money she offered to give the money back but the shop manager refused and said he wanted it took further. What can she do? This is not her first affence she did a stupid thing when she was younger but this time is was amistake and retail loss prevention are asking for 190 pounds which is a joke.
What if RLP's policy instead of imposing a big fine (oh, sorry, recovering their "costs" was stoning the alleged culprit? Would that be acceptable? Of course not.

We are talking of a private company imposing a civil penalty on a presumption of guilt, all of which stinks to high heaven.

Retail Loss Prevention are not the police, nor are they judges - the point is that they have no legal authority to dish out fines. There have been many threads about them and their bullish attitude to the law; they make interesting reading if only for the legal points on the power of citizens' arrest.

[jno]

if the assistant handed over the money voluntarily, where's the fraud? It wasn't even the customer's mistake. On what you've said, at the very least this sounds like completely the wrong charge.