logo
Fraudster posed as Greggs boss to defraud council during pandemic

Fraudster posed as Greggs boss to defraud council during pandemic

Telegraph15-04-2025

A fraudster who posed as a Greggs boss to defraud a city council out of £710,000 in Covid loans has been jailed for four years.
Aftab Baig, 47, pretended to be a property manager for the bakery chain giant to fraudulently claim small business grants from Leeds city council during the pandemic.
He received the money against a number of Greggs buildings in the West Yorkshire city soon after Britain went into lockdown, Leeds Crown Court heard.
Guy Kearl KC, the Recorder of Leeds, told him: 'This was a disgraceful attempt to deprive the government of monies, which were in short supply at a time of extreme public anxiety and crisis.'
The judge said the 'sophisticated' fraud was conducted at a 'time of national emergency'.
Baig, of Paisley Road West, Glasgow, was found guilty of three counts at his trial. Leeds city council called his actions 'brazen and calculated'.
Covid small business scheme exploited
During the Covid pandemic, the government created a scheme called the Small Business Grant Fund to assist small businesses with their trading amid the lockdown. It was administered by local authorities.
In order to qualify for a grant, applicants had to complete an online application form and then submit it to the relevant local authority.
Nadim Bashir, prosecutor, told the court that Baig was the sole director of AUE Catering LTD, which operated within the take-away food business.
Baig initially sent an email pretending to be the group property manager for Greggs PLC to Leeds city council, asking for a business rates reference number for 32 business properties in the city.
This was provided by the council, after which he made a claim for £710,000 and, whilst posing as a responsible officer for Greggs PLC, provided his own Barclays Bank details for AUE Catering.
That sum was authorised by the business rates manager for Leeds city council, and the money was then sent to the AUE Catering Limited bank account.
Five days after the money had been paid on 22 May 2020, the council received information that the applications were fraudulent and his bank account was frozen. Before it was frozen, Baig had managed to transfer £95,000 to two separate accounts, one in the Netherlands.
On July 8, police found £16,000 in cash at his Glasgow flat and remittance slips from Leeds city council in the glove box of his car
Mr Bashir said the council has recovered most of the money but that over £90,000 remains outstanding and that there will be a proceeds of crime hearing at a later date.
In mitigation, Huw Edwards, Baig's barrister, said Baig had no previous convictions and the fraud was 'out of character'.
Defrauding the public
Following the guilty verdict, Kelly Ward, of the Crown Prosectuion Service, said: 'Baig took advantage of the difficult circumstances of the pandemic in 2020 to defraud the council out of taxpayers' money.
'Those who cheat the public purse are stealing funds which should rightly go towards services and the community or, in this case, towards supporting small businesses through an extremely challenging time.'
A Leeds city council spokesman said: 'This money was intended to support local businesses in Leeds at a time when they were facing unprecedented pressures and when the city and its communities were coming together to get through the pandemic.
'For someone to take advantage of such challenging circumstances and defraud the public purse is shocking and we would like to thank all those involved in this investigation for helping to ensure justice has been served.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Bessent says US may 'roll the date forward' for some after 90-day tariff pause ends
Bessent says US may 'roll the date forward' for some after 90-day tariff pause ends

Reuters

time13 minutes ago

  • Reuters

Bessent says US may 'roll the date forward' for some after 90-day tariff pause ends

June 11 (Reuters) - U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Wednesday said the Trump administration is prepared to "roll the date forward" with trading partners negotiating in good faith if the deadline marking the end of the 90-day pause on President Donald Trump's reciprocal tariffs is reached with no deal. "It is highly likely that those countries - or trading blocs as is the case with the EU - who are negotiating in good faith, we will roll the date forward to continue the good-faith negotiations," Bessent told the House Ways and Means Committee. "If someone is not negotiating, then we will not." Bessent's remarks, in response to a question from a Democratic lawmaker, marked the first time a Trump administration official has indicated some flexibility around the expiration date for the pause. That date - July 8 - is now just four weeks away, and so far the White House has struck only one preliminary deal with a major foreign trading partner affected by the pause, Britain. A deal struck on Tuesday in London with China to de-escalate that bilateral trade war is proceeding on a separate track and timeline. The White House did not immediately respond to a question about whether Trump shared Bessent's view. Trump announced the pause on April 9, a week after unveiling "Liberation Day" tariffs against nearly all U.S. trading partners that proved to be so unexpectedly large and sweeping that it sent global financial markets into near panic. The S&P 500 Index (.SPX), opens new tab plunged more than 12% in four days for its heftiest run of losses since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020. Investors were so rattled they bailed out of safe-haven U.S. Treasury securities, sending bond yields rocketing higher. The dollar sank. Markets started their recovery on April 9 when Trump unexpectedly announced the pause. A further leg up in the recovery followed in early May when the Trump team reached a preliminary deal to dial back the triple-digit tariff rates it had imposed on goods from China. The events have given rise to what some on Wall Street have parodied as the "TACO" trade - an acronym for Trump Always Chickens Out. "The only time the market has reacted positively is when the administration is in retreat from key policy areas," Democratic Representative Don Beyer of Virginia told Bessent before pressing him on what should be expected at the end of the next deadline next month. "As I have said repeatedly there are 18 important trading partners. We are working toward deals with those," Bessent said before going on to signal a willingness to offer extensions to those negotiating in good faith.

Company linked to Tory Peer Baroness Mone should pay back £121m for ‘faulty' PPE, High Court hears
Company linked to Tory Peer Baroness Mone should pay back £121m for ‘faulty' PPE, High Court hears

Wales Online

time5 hours ago

  • Wales Online

Company linked to Tory Peer Baroness Mone should pay back £121m for ‘faulty' PPE, High Court hears

Company linked to Tory Peer Baroness Mone should pay back £121m for 'faulty' PPE, High Court hears PPE Medpro is being sued for an alleged breach of contract over the supply of PPE during the Covid pandemic, with the Government claiming the gowns were unusable The company in court is linked to Baroness Mone (Image: PA Archive/PA Images ) A company linked to Tory peer Michelle Mone should pay back more than £121 million for breaching a Government contract for 25 million surgical gowns during the coronavirus pandemic, the High Court has heard. The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) is suing PPE Medpro for allegedly breaching a deal for the gowns, with lawyers for the Government telling the court they were "faulty" because they were not sterile. ‌ The company, a consortium led by Baroness Mone's husband, businessman Doug Barrowman, was awarded Government contracts by the former Conservative administration to supply PPE during the pandemic, after she recommended it to ministers. Any wrongdoing has been denied. For our free daily briefing on the biggest issues facing the nation, sign up to the Wales Matters newsletter here ‌ The Government is seeking to recover the costs of the contract, as well as the costs of transporting and storing the items, which amount to an additional £8,648,691. PPE Medpro said it "categorically denies" breaching the contract, and its lawyers claimed the company had been "singled out for unfair treatment". Opening the trial on Wednesday, Paul Stanley KC, for the DHSC, said: "This case is simply about whether 25 million surgical gowns provided by PPE Medpro were faulty. Article continues below "It is, in short, a technical case about detailed legal and industry standards that apply to sterile gowns." Mr Stanley said in written submissions the "initial contact with Medpro came through Baroness Mone", with discussions about the contract then going through one of the company's directors, Anthony Page. Baroness Mone remained "active throughout" the negotiations, Mr Stanley said, with the peer stating Mr Barrowman had "years of experience in manufacturing, procurement and management of supply chains". ‌ But he told the court Baroness Mone's communications were "not part of this case", which was "simply about compliance". He said: "The department does not allege anything improper happened, and we are not concerned with any profits made by anybody." In court documents from May this year, the DHSC said the gowns were delivered to the UK in 72 lots between August and October, 2020, with £121,999,219.20 paid to PPE Medpro between July and August that year. ‌ The department rejected the gowns in December, 2020, and told the company it would have to repay the money, but this has not happened and the gowns remain in storage, unable to be used. In written submissions for trial, Mr Stanley said 99.9999% of the gowns should have been sterile under the terms of the contract, equating to one in a million being unusable. The DHSC claims the contract also specified PPE Medpro had to sterilise the gowns using a "validated process", attested by CE marking, which indicates a product has met certain medical standards. ‌ He said "none of those things happened", with no validated sterilisation process being followed, and the gowns supplied with invalid CE marking. He continued that 140 gowns were later tested for sterility, with 103 failing. He said: "Whatever was done to sterilise the gowns had not achieved its purpose, because more than one in a million of them was contaminated when delivered. ‌ "On that basis, DHSC was entitled to reject the gowns, or is entitled to damages, which amount to the full price and storage costs." In his written submissions, Charles Samek KC, for PPE Medpro, said the "only plausible reason" for the gowns becoming contaminated was due to "the transport and storage conditions or events to which the gowns were subject", after they had been delivered to the DHSC. He added the testing did not happen until several months after the gowns were rejected, and the samples selected were not "representative of the whole population", meaning "no proper conclusions may be drawn". ‌ He said the DHSC's claim was "contrived and opportunistic" and PPE Medpro had been "made the 'fall guy' for a catalogue of failures and errors" by the department. He said: "It has perhaps been singled out because of the high profiles of those said to be associated with PPE Medpro, and/or because it is perceived to be a supplier with financial resources behind it. "In reality, an archetypal case of 'buyer's remorse', where DHSC simply seeks to get out of a bargain it wished it never entered into, left, as it is, with over £8 billion of purchased and unused PPE as a result of an untrammelled and uncontrolled buying spree with taxpayers' money." ‌ He also said there was a "delicious irony" that Baroness Mone was mentioned in the DHSC's written submissions, when she had "zero relevance to the contractual issues in this case". Neither Baroness Mone nor Mr Barrowman is due to give evidence in the trial, and did not attend the first day of the hearing on Wednesday. A PPE Medpro spokesperson said the company "categorically denies breaching its obligations" and will "robustly defend" the claim. Article continues below The trial before Mrs Justice Cockerill is due to last five weeks, with a judgment expected in writing at a later date.

Moment ‘predator' accused of posing as Uber driver to attack woman is stopped by cops who found ‘rape kit' in car
Moment ‘predator' accused of posing as Uber driver to attack woman is stopped by cops who found ‘rape kit' in car

Scottish Sun

time6 hours ago

  • Scottish Sun

Moment ‘predator' accused of posing as Uber driver to attack woman is stopped by cops who found ‘rape kit' in car

STREET 'PROWLER' Moment 'predator' accused of posing as Uber driver to attack woman is stopped by cops who found 'rape kit' in car THIS is the moment a man who allegedly posed as an Uber driver to attack a woman was stopped by cops with a "rape" kit, a court heard. Graham Head is accused of sexually assaulting the 25-year-old after offering her a free ride home in the early hours. Advertisement 3 Graham Head was pulled over by police after allegedly assaulting a woman 3 He has denied the charges against him Jurors at Lewes Crown Court heard she managed to read the driver's number plate after being attacked. She then called 999 to report being assaulted by a man in latex gloves and a Covid mask who was the driver of a car with registration staring L21, it was said. The court was told Head was a "sexual predator" who "slipped up" the night he was arrested. In footage shown to jurors, police can be seen talking to Head, 68, after pulling him over in Brighton. Advertisement He is asked by the officers he had any interaction with a female in the minutes before he was stopped. Head tells police through a blue face mask: 'No, I haven't. 'I'm going back to Pevensey.' Officers tell Head his personalised registration matches a partial plate given by the woman minutes before. Advertisement He tells police: 'Definitely not me, no.' As he is speaking, police decide to search his car where they found latex gloves, viagra, condoms and a balaclava that allegedly formed a rape kit. When asked why he had the condoms and viagra, Head said: "I'm a normal red blooded male". The court heard Head later changed his story and told police he had picked the woman up as she looked "worse for wear". Advertisement He said: "I know I haven't done it. 'If I took her to the correct address, that's not kidnapping. 'I never said to her I was an Uber driver, I've never said that ever. 'I did not sexually assault that lady, I didn't." Advertisement Jurors heard police later found business cards advertising him as a "N-Uber driver" that were emblazoned with the slogan "Safe and Reliable - For All Occasions". Head is also accused of assaulting an 19-year-old woman he picked up near Hove Park. The two attacks allegedly took place in the early hours of August 19 and November 18, 2022. The 25-year-old woman has since died, the jury was told. Advertisement Head denies kidnapping, attempted rape and three sexual assaults. The trial continues.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store