Security company G4S pays £ 44m + after government overload

Security giant G4S has been ordered to pay £ 44.4 million to avoid prosecution after "overwhelmingly" overwhelming the government for tagged criminals, including some who have died.

The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and G4S agreed on a fine of more than £ 38.5m and a cost of £ 5.9m after a nearly ten-year investigation found three fraud cases.

The company "dishonestly misled" the government to increase profits, the OFS said.

It comes after G4S was dramatically unloaded from labeling criminals as a penalty for taxpayer overload in 2013.

G4S said a subsidiary, G4S Care & Justice, assumed responsibility for the offenses between August 2011 and May 2012.

The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and G4S (File Image) agreed on a fine of more than £ 38.5 million and a cost of £ 5.9 million after an investigation found three cases of fraud

The Deferred Protection Agreement (DPA) is a court-approved agreement that allows law enforcement to be suspended as long as the organization meets certain conditions.

After working with the OFS, the company received a 40 percent discount on its fine.

G4S Care & Justice provided electronic surveillance services to the government from 2005 to 2013, and the fraud was associated with a "very significant public loss" according to the present ruling.

G4S has been overwhelmed by tens of thousands of criminals, including those who have left the country, been returned to prison, or even died.

The company previously admitted taxpayers for phantom electronic tags that had been removed or not attached at all to overwhelm over £ 24million.

Error story from G4S

The UK-based security company dates back to a security firm founded in Denmark in 1901.

G4S was founded when Group 4 merged with Securicor in 2004. The company has a long list of bugs, including:

  • In 1993, Group 4 was the first private company to run prison escort services, and lost seven inmates within three weeks
  • A year later, a hunger strike escaped from Campsfield House internment camp, which was guarded by Group 4
  • In 1997, the company was found to have brought a prisoner between two vans to a gas station forecourt
  • Three prisoners fled Peterborough Crown Court in 2001
  • In 2011, G4S employees lost a set of cell phone keys just a few days after they took over the Birmingham prison
  • The workers attached an electronic label to the criminal Christopher Lowcock's artificial limb
  • In 2012, the company was unable to train enough guards for the London Games, which meant 3,500 soldiers had to be recalled from vacation
  • In March 2013, a G4S security guard at Heathrow ordered the Royal Navy engineer Nicky Howse to take off her uniform before flying to the US because it was "offensive".

Today's data protection agency has been approved by Justice William Davis at the Royal Courts of Justice and means that G4S Care & Justice will not be prosecuted.

The G4S subsidiary already paid GBP 121.3 million to the MoJ after a civil settlement in 2014.

In January 2014, G4S Care & Justice reported that it had discovered material that indicated that the company had not submitted accurate financial reports to the MoJ.

The OFS found that contracts for electronic surveillance services, including tagged criminals, were fraudulent.

The judge said on Friday before the court: "I declare that this data protection authority is in the interest of justice and that its terms are fair, fair and proportionate."

In his judgment, he wrote: “The intensity of the external audit, as set out in the data protection authority, is greater than in any previous data protection authority.

"This is necessary and appropriate because both G4S C&J and the parent company are subject to government contracts."

He added that it is important to be certain that adequate controls are in place to prevent the problem from recurring.

& # 39; The data protection authority will be valid for three years. The compliance measures will be continued and reviewed during this period. This will provide further certainty regarding the behavior of G4S and G4S C&J, ”he said.

The Director of the Heavy Fraud Office, Lisa Osofsky, criticized the "methodological fraud of the company against the Ministry of Justice".

She added: & # 39; This data protection authority ensures that G4S C & J is held accountable. It also guarantees that G4S C & J and its parent company G4S plc – a major government supplier – will undergo unprecedented multi-year testing and security. & # 39;

Clare Montgomery QC, representative of G4S, repeated an apology on behalf of the company, saying it "absolutely condemns this type of behavior".

She added, "With the apology, it is also important to note that it is particularly heartfelt because integrity is in the heat of G4S 'business."

The scandal could go back to 1999, when criminals were started being tagged in England and Wales.

Since then, the taxpayer has spent £ 1 billion on identifying and monitoring offenders. The contracts for 2013 started in 2005.

The OFS found that the contracts for electronic surveillance services were fraudulent (file picture).

The OFS found that the contracts for electronic surveillance services were fraudulent (file picture).

In some cases, the government has been charged by private contractors for years after the labeling ceased, and in some cases the labeling of markings for dead was charged.

G4S previously apologized and offered to repay £ 24.1 million.

A spokesman agreed to "mistakenly consider himself contractually entitled to charge for surveillance services if devices were not installed or removed."

The company insisted on an independent review it had commissioned, "has found no evidence of dishonesty or criminal conduct on the part of an employee".

However, the Justice Department made it clear that the government would not accept the voluntary offer.

A report by the National Court of Auditors in the electronic surveillance contracts found that the company billed multiple tags for individual criminals.

(tagsToTranslate) Dailymail (t) News (t) Crime (t) News from the British government and updates from the British cabinet