Richard Padley

White Collar Crime, Fraud and Money Laundering

Richard commenced his career working as part of the white-collar crime teams for both Birds Solicitors and Peters & Peters Solicitors LLP. Richard assisted with matters of fraud, bribery and money laundering both on a national and international scale. During this time Richard assisted in the preparation of the case of an individual charged with insider trading in Operation Saturn, at the time the largest insider trading case prosecuted by the FCA, working closely with Patrick Gibbs KC and Alison Pople KC. In January 2015 Richard re-joined Peters & Peters for six months on secondment. Whilst there, amongst other matters, he assisted with the defence of an individual charged in respect of their role in the Barclays-Qatar funding arrangements.

In his own practice Richard is regularly instructed to both prosecute and defend allegations of fraud, money laundering and matters involving financial misconduct. He has worked with a range of experts in assisting to build a case, such as forensic accountants to assist with the explanation of transactions and calculation of loss.

He is currently advising an individual being investigated by the FCA in relation to alleged fraudulent use of company funds, as well as associated disclosure notices. He is long standing disclosure Counsel in relation to allegations of fraud arising from cheating on English language tests. 

Confiscation, Asset Forfeiture and Restraint

Richard is regularly instructed to advise and represent prosecuting authorities, defendants and third parties at confiscation hearings, whether having been instructed in the substantive proceedings or not. He is well verse with the complexities of the legislation and practical requirements that come with addressing confiscation orders.

Richard has spent time working with the SFO Proceeds of Crime and International Assistance team working on the preparation for contested confiscation and restraint hearings.

Richard has represented both companies and individuals subject to account freezing and restraint orders and has successfully challenged the imposition and sought the variation of these types of orders. He is regularly instructed by the CPS Proceeds of Crime team to secure restraint orders. Further he is instructed on behalf of a foreign government to deal with long standing matters of restraint in the High Court under the Drug Trafficking Act 1994.  

Regulatory Crime

Richard is regularly instructed by a range of government departments, local authorities, and defendants in respect of regulatory matters. His recent experience includes matters relating to use of property, trademark infringements and health and safety offences. 

Professional Discipline

Richard has represented a broad range of professionals at disciplinary tribunal hearings including BAPC, SWE, NMC, HCPC and GDC. Richard has attended at all stages of the disciplinary proceedings process from interim order applications to fully contested final hearings. 

General Crime

Richard is experienced in all manner of general criminal matters. He is confident in presenting complex legal and factual submissions to both lay and legal tribunals. He works well with people of all backgrounds. He can quickly get to grip with cases and is attentive and appreciative of the importance of detail. Richard has expertise in dealing with matters involving aspects of mental health, drawing from his expertise in writing ‘A Practical Guide to the use of Expert Evidence in Criminal Trials’ and presenting seminars on the topic. Richard is well verse with the practical necessities in ensuring cell site and forensic evidence can be appropriately presented, and in appropriates case, undermined.    

Fraud and Money Laundering

R v JMB and 6 others (Southwark CC): Led junior prosecuting seven individuals for the fraudulent use of credits cards to purchase train tickets. 

R v KM and AO (Warwick CC): Prosecution of two individuals for money laundering offences arising from finding over £100,000 cash under an upturned mattress. 

R v OA, BB and OB (Inner London CC): Led junior prosecuting three individuals for the fraudulent use of credit cards and bank accounts applied for and opened in others names to fund lifestyle. 

R v SF (Aylesbury CC): Prosecuted SF in relation to allegations of fraudulently abusing her position of employment as a bookkeeper.

R v R and T (Woolwich CC): Prosecuted R and T in relation to the fraudulent abuse of a solicitors client account, used by a legal assistant for the purposes of purchasing investment property.

Op Kraken (Birmingham CC): Presently instructed, being led by Robert O’ Sullivan QC and Stephen Hopper, in the ongoing prosecution of 14 individuals for fraudulently engaging in English language speaking tests on behalf of others.

Op Limestone (Southwark CC): Led by James Norman, the successful prosecution of two individuals for money laundering offences in respect of a central London money service bureau, with criminal property exceeding £6m.

Confiscation, Asset Forfeiture and Restraint

Government of Netherlands v HB and others (High Court, and Court of Appeal ongoing): Instructed by Government of Netherlands (via CPS) to represent their interests in ongoing proceedings under DTA94 and POCA02 and enforcement proceedings against HB’s brother.

SFO v OB (Southwark CC): Presently instructed, led by Andrew Trollope QC, in relation to the ongoing appeal and confiscation proceedings following OB’s conviction for conspiracy to defraud.

FA Ltd (Folkstone MC): Successfully opposed a HMRC application for an account freezing order. Having been instructed shortly before the hearing Richard was able to coordinate the compilation of an extensive bundle of evidence establishing the legitimacy of FA Ltd and its trade, as well as the due diligence conducted on its customers. This was used to persuade the court that HMRC had not met the low threshold required in order to secure an AFO. Further a successful costs argument was raised against HMRC.

R v MO (Guildford CC): Prosecuting confiscation proceedings against MO in relation to benefit gained from his role in coordinating 21 separate cannabis factories around the South East. Approximate benefit circa £10m, available circa £3m.

R v SH (Sheffield CC): Led by Lisa Freeman, Richard represented SH in relation to POCA proceedings. Following extensive discussions relating to the Crown’s forensic accountant an order was agreed with benefit over £435k, £1m less than the prosecution had sought.  

R v PB (Birmingham CC): Led by Jon Rees QC, advising and representing PB in response to a section 22 application seeking an increase of £1.5m in an amount to be paid by way of confiscation. This case involved extensive argument in respect of the scope of section 22 to cases where civil proceedings had been commenced.

Regulatory Crime

HSE v MC Ltd (Westminster MC): Prosecution of MC Ltd for failing to conduct appropriate checks on electrical equipment leading to an individual under their supervision cutting through a live wire resulting in significant burns injuries. 

HSE v CAW Ltd (Chelmsford MC): Prosecution of CAW Ltd for using inappropriate techniques to bend metal sheets, resulting in fragmentation of a metal bar causing life threatening injuries to an employee. 

HSE v MM Ltd (Peterborough MC): Prosecution of MM Ltd following the death of an employee due to insufficient control measures in place to monitor and supervise the recent graduate during the early stages of his career.

HSE v TET Ltd (Westminster MC): Prosecution of an educational trust following the collapse of a ceiling onto a primary school classroom full of children, following overloading of the ceiling. 

LBE v PE Ltd (Highbury Corner MC and Wood Green CC): Prosecuting PE Ltd on behalf of LBE in relation to allegations of breaching a planning enforcement notice. The case involved extensive legal arguments surrounding abuse of process, the terns of the enforcement notice and its legality. Conviction upheld in the Crown Court. 

WMC v CG Ltd (Westminster MC): Advising and representing CG Ltd, a property company with a multi-million pound turnover, in respect of allegations contrary to Environmental Protection Act 1990. Following written representations, the private prosecutor agreed to withdraw the proceedings against CG Ltd.

Professional Discipline

NMC v DJ: Representing DJ at an 11 day hearing involving allegations of mistreatment towards a vulnerable patient at a mental health hospital. Whilst some of the allegations were found proven, none were found to have amounted to misconduct allowing DJ to continue their unblemished career. 

NMC v OD: Representing OD at a 12 day hearing involving allegations that OD and another had forced patients to take medication. A successful submission of no case to answer was made at the conclusion of the NMC’s evidence, bringing the case to an early conclusion. 

HCPC v MS: Representing MS, who was alleged to have undertaken an inappropriate procedure on a patient in labour. Following cross examination of the HCPC’s expert, it became clear that the expert had made fundamental mistakes in their conclusions in respect of what had in fact taken place. All allegations dismissed.

BAPC v SH: Representing the complainant (the prosecuting regulator not represented) in respect of allegations of sexual misconduct towards her by her counsellor. Following extensive questioning of the registrant, significant allegations were found proven with the result that the registrant was struck off.

General Crime

R v SA (Birmingham CC): Led junior prosecuting an allegation of murder relating to an incident of road rage, the victim dying several years later. The case focused on the issue of causation, involving in excess of 20 experts in the case ranging from road traffic collision reconstruction experts, trichologists, audiologists, toxicologists and pathologists amongst others. 

R v MA, FC, LS and YK (Luton CC): Led junior prosecuting an eight week trial alleging drug dealing and blackmail. 

R v MH and KK (Southwark CC): Led junior in a prosecution of assisting illegal immigration. The case involved extensive analysis of evidence obtained from overseas, notably evidence of stops and searches in Europe, as well as telephone evidence linking the UK arm of the operation. 

R v KB, HMK, FM and JA (Snaresbrook CC): Led junior in the prosecution of four individuals for false imprisonment and GBH with intent of three young victims in an abandoned flat over a three-week period. Including contempt proceedings against a prosecution witness due to their conduct in court towards Counsel and the Judge. 

R v GH (Guildford CC): Successfully defending GH in relation to allegations of rape and controlling and coercive behaviour. A review of the unused material, including extensive telephone records, led to the presentation of material which undermined the complainant’s version of events.

• CPS List – Level 3
• CPS Specialist Fraud List – Level 3
• CPS Specialist Proceeds of Crime List – Level 3
• CPS Specialist Serious Crime List – Level 2
• Regulatory Panel – B Panel
• SFO General List – B Panel
• SFO Proceeds of Crime and International Assistance – B Panel