Law Unit 4 Case Cards - Fraud By False Representation

False Representation

MPC v Charles (1977)

D agreed with his bank manager that he would not write more than one cheque per day and for not more than £30. He was permitted to keep his cheque guarantee card. In a casino he wrote 30 cheques, each for £25, using his cheque guarantee card. 

Held: D was guilty of deception because he was not authorised to use the cheque guarantee card in that way.

False Representation

R v Lambie (1982)

D exceeded her credit limit on her Visa card and failed to pay any of her debt. Barclay card asked her to return the card. She continued to use it.

Held: D falsely represented that she was entitled to use the card in that way, in that transaction. 

False Representation

R v Nabina (1999)

D lied about his circumstances in order to obtain various credit cards. He used these in several shops etc. 

Held: that he had not deceived the ships because he was authorised at that point to use the cards. He would be guilty of fraud against the card issuers. 

Intending to Make a Gain or Cause a Loss

DPP v Ray (1974)

D went into a restaurant with friends, believing they would pay for his meal. Later they all agreed to run off without payment when the waiters were in the kitchen. 

Held: that D's initial implied representation that he would be paid for was true, but there was a false representation of his present intention when he remained at the table after the agreement not to pay.

Intention to Make a Gain or Cause a Loss

R v Rai (2000)

D's mother was infirm so he applied for a council grant to install a downstairs bathroom. Two days after the grant approval, she died. He failed to rectify the impression that the circumstances were unchanged.

Held: that D misrepresented his present intention.