Railway accountant faces years behind bars

A former management accountant has been found guilty of defrauding a struggling railway company and is expected to be sentenced to several years in prison later this month.

Corina Heslop, who denied the charges levelled against her, was found guilty of nine out of 10 offences including eight counts of fraud and one for possessing items for use in fraud. She was cleared of a criminal damage offence.

Following a three-week trial at Durham Crown Court, which centred on a £36,781 fraud accusation, the Bishop Auckland accountant is set to be sentenced on 29 June.

Judge Christopher Prince warned her that she would be facing up to six years in prison. As reported in the Northern Echo, he told her: “The guidelines under which I operate, for an offence of this type, involving nearly £40,000 from an employer, you would be expected to receive a sentence of between four and five years.”

Continued...

» Register now

The full article is available to registered AccountingWEB members only. To read the rest of this article you’ll need to login or register.

Registration is FREE and allows you to view all content, ask questions, comment and much more.

Comments

Stealing    1 thanks

rayhelmke | | Permalink

so you can steal almost 70K from the tax payer and expect only 1 year but steal 40K from an employer and you get 4-5 years... how does that work!

“The guidelines under which I operate, for an offence of this type, involving nearly £40,000 from an employer, you would be expected to receive a sentence of between four and five years.”

"fraudulently obtaining £70,000 in housing benefit over an eight-year period, which the judge took into consideration: “For an offence of that nature the sentence would be of the order of 12 months"

somethings not right here!

Steven Tucker's picture

Free accommodation

Steven Tucker | | Permalink

The housing benefit fraud has given her a total of 9 years of state-provided accommodation. Perhaps extending that period seemed counter-productive :-)

 

But seriously, I'd be interested in the legal reason why the other fraud was more serious - possibly something to do with the number of charges or the abuse of her position. Anyone know the answer?

POCA

The Black Knight | | Permalink

Will she have to repay it?

Always amazes me how silly these people are.

How many frauds are undiscovered or to difficult to prove because some simple attempt to cover them up was employed. Fancy using your own bank account??

At least for once justice was seen to be done for a smallish amount. Unusual today.

Might send a few jitters to those that have "only nicked a small amount and they won't be interested in me" brigade.

 

Fraud    2 thanks

davidkirk | | Permalink

Stealing from one's employer has long been considered more serious than other forms of fraud, because of the relationship of trust that needs to exist between employers and employees for business to work properly.

Steve-EBL's picture

She will only serve half, and

Steve-EBL | | Permalink

She will only serve half, and it will probably be in open conditions, a bit like butlins really.