Patricia Wilson > Bark&co > London, England > Lawyer Profile

Patricia Wilson

Work Department

Serious Crime/Fraud/POCA

Position

Pat is a criminal defence expert in white collar and business crime, general criminal defence including serious drugs offences, rape, murder and kidnap, and proceeds of crime offences.

She  has significant experience defending clients in serious and complex criminal cases facing charges brought by CPS, HMRC, SFO, FCA, The Pensions Regulator and Trading Standards.  Pat has particular expertise in representing clients in POCA related matters concerning money laundering, confiscation, enforcement, restraint orders and asset forfeiture proceedings.

‘’Pat is extremely organised and clear in her instructions. She is always willing to go the extra mile to ensure the best possible outcome for her clients. She has worked on a number of high -profile cases but brings the same level of attention to detail to cases large and small. She has good knowledge of the law and doesn’t leave any stone unturned.”

Chambers & Partners 2021

Career

Joined Bark&co in 2000 qualified as a solicitor in 2004. 

Notable cases:

Crime/Fraud

R v N – Operation Dojo – Southwark Crown Court

Represented defendant charged with offence of fraudulent evasion of duty on cigarettes and tobacco. 

R v I – Operation Nautical – Oxford Crown Court

Represented client charged with offences of Rape and Conspiracy to Rape involving allegations of Child Sexual Exploitation of two under-age girls. Defendant was acquitted by jury of all charges following trial. This was a highly sensitive, high profile case with convictions for offences of a similar nature being widely reported in the press.at the time. 

R v K – Snaresbrook Crown Court 

Represented defendant charged with offence of Conspiracy to Supply Class A drugs.

R v R – Operation Tavernhouse 2 – Leeds Crown Court

Represented the MD of one of the largest bed manufacturers in the country who had been charged with conspiracy to traffic individuals (Hungarian nationals) within the UK – he conspired with other persons to arrange or facilitate travel within the UK by individuals in respect of whom they believed that an offence contrary to section 4(1) Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants etc) Act 2004 may have been committed with intent to exploit those individuals in the UK or elsewhere.

R v S – Operation ModCons – Maidstone Crown Court

Represented the CEO of a major £multi-million logistics company charged with conspiracy and money laundering offences relating to a huge series of payroll frauds. He faced allegations of conspiring with corrupt accountants and a corrupt former HMRC officer to defraud HMRC of a sum in excess of £6.9 million in PAYE, NICS, VAT and CIS due on high profile construction projects.  It was alleged that the proceeds of the fraud were laundered through companies and bank accounts in the UK, Gibraltar, and elsewhere. This was a very complex case involving international money laundering, which involved the analysis of a large volume of accounting evidence.

R v T – KIngston Crown Court

Represented defendant charged with GBH who was acquitted by jury following trial.

POCA Confiscation Proceedings

R v B – Birmingham Crown Court

Representing defendant in contested POCA s.22 Application.  Crown are seeking to increase confiscation order available amount by £1.5m. 

R v H – Sheffield Crown Court

Representing defendant in POCA confiscation proceedings. 

R v I – Mancheseter Crown Court

Represented defendant in contested POCA confiscation proceedings.  Avaialble amount sought by the defence accepted by the court.

R v F – Blackfriars Crown Court

Represented defendant in POCA confiscation proceedings. Crown seeking confiscation order in the sum of £5m.  Order agreed substantially lower.

R v H – Blackfriars Crown Court

Represented defendant in confiscation proceedings following his conviction for money laundering offences x 2 in the Blackfriars Crown Court. The defendant was charged with one count of conspiring with other persons to transfer criminal property, namely, banknotes which were the proceeds of criminal conduct or which in whole or in part directly or indirectly represented such proceeds, and which they knew were or represented such proceeds in contravention of section 327(1)(d) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 and one count of entering into a money laundering arrangement contrary to section 328(1) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

R v A – Manchester Crown Court

Represented defendant, who was charged with benefit fraud offences, at his trial in the Crown Court at Manchester Minshull Street and in his subsequent confiscation proceedings following conviction. The Crown sought a benefit figure and available asset figure of £1.6m and £1.4m, respectively. Following a contested confiscation hearing and complex legal argument, a confiscation order was made by the court for benefit and available amount in the sum of £90,000.

R v W – Southwark Crown Court

Represented defendant in his confiscation proceedings, following conviction, who had been charged with four counts of conspiracy to defraud. The defendant, along with his father and brother, were convicted of organising and controlling a large scale share fraud (‘Boiler room’ fraud). The Crown sought a benefit figure of £26m. A contested hearing was avoided further to negotiations with the Crown and a confiscation order was made by the court in the sum of £395k

Education

LLB 2:1 – Thames Valley University
Eversheds prize
Legal Practice Course – Thames Valley University