by Sue Flood
•
30 July 2024
Interview with Sue Flood on Pension Fraud and HMRC Charges Q: Sue, can you shed some light on how pension fraud became so rampant around 14 years ago? Sue Flood: The regulatory framework was alarmingly weak around 14 years ago, which enabled fraudulent schemes to proliferate. HMRC's registration of these bogus occupational schemes lent them an air of legitimacy. Perpetrators set out to defraud & exploited this, selling , recommending these schemes to unsuspecting victims through FCA-regulated advisors. These bogus schemes were presented as genuine personal pensions but were, in fact, bogus schemes and in some cases, fraudulent. This period also saw a significant rise in investment fraud, where regulated financial advisors exploited their clients rather than providing honest, beneficial advice. In my opinion, it was a period of liberalisation that had the unintended consequence of allowing investment and pension fraud and scams to flourish. Q: Can you explain more about pension fraud /liberation as its depicted and the role of HMRC charges? Sue Flood: Pension liberation (Fraud) gives the impression that victims set out to access pension funds before the age of 55, often marketed as a way to gain access to cash lump sums from retirement savings. Many of these schemes were falsely marketed by accredited regulated advisors as legitimate, but unfortunately, in most cases, these bogus occupational schemes were designed to exploit and defraud individuals unbeknown to the victims . HMRC’s role has been unfairly punitive treating everybody who received FCA advice to access their pension early the same. Instead of taking into account the crime committed against the individual and the consequence of that eg they could have had the entire pension withdrawal stolen from them and offering support or addressing the wrongdoing of those who set up these fraudulent schemes bogus schemes , HMRC has imposed severe penalties on the victims, treating them as if they were complicit in the fraud. The 55% tax charges on what HMRC deemed unauthorised payments have only added to the financial burden on victims, compounding their suffering with no allowances or exemptions made for individual circumstances. Q: How did these fraudulent schemes deceive people, and what were some examples? Sue Flood: Some of the schemes created a false sense of legitimacy, backed by HMRC registration , tpr registration This made them appear credible, allowing unscrupulous accredited FCA advisors to deceive their clients, a clear breach of trust . Victims ranged from ordinary citizens, like nurses and firefighters, police officers to prominent business figures. They all trusted these qualified regulated professionals, only to be betrayed. The deception was so convincing that it was difficult for people to question or detect the fraud until it was too late. Q: What has been the impact of these frauds on the victims, particularly concerning HMRC’s involvement? Sue Flood: The impact has been catastrophic. Victims in some tragic cases have lost their pension funds to schemes that were later declared fraudulent or dishonest by the courts. Despite this, in my opinion, HMRC’s classification of these payments as unauthorised and the imposition of a harsh 55% tax was unjust. The lack of support from regulatory bodies like Action Fraud, TPR, and HMRC has left victims in dire straits. For 14 years, they have faced psychological and financial stresses that have driven them to breaking point, including accrued interest and threats from government trustees and HMRC. This relentless pressure has only compounded their suffering had a catastrophic impact on families. Q: What role has HMRC played in exacerbating the victims’ hardships? Sue Flood: HMRC’s role has, in my opinion, been extremely unethical detrimental to the victims' well-being. Instead of providing relief or support, they have engaged in what victims describe as psychological warfare. Victims feel persecuted. They feel like they have been treated as criminals. The aggressive enforcement of tax penalties, combined with threatening communications, bailiffs, have pushed victims further into absolute crisis. The lack of empathy and continued pressure from HMRC has been both cruel and unjust in my opinion and completely at odds with HMRC’s Charter responsibilities. This all needs to be properly investigated and safeguarding measures put immediately in place to protect vulnerable victims of crime being further victimised. Q: HMRC has recently made statements in the press in relation to this issue suggesting that if something seems too good to be true, it probably is. Were these schemes truly too good to be true, and would wiping these charges put victims at an unfair advantage? Sue Flood: No, these statements by HMRC are a form of victim blaming. The schemes were not too good to be true in the eyes of the victims; they were presented as legitimate by FCA authorised and regulated advisors. These professionals gave advice and assured people they did not advise of any consequences, and given their trusted positions, victims had no reason to doubt their advice. The idea that victims were greedy or seeking an unfair advantage is just not true at all. Many of the individuals affected were key workers, like fireman. nurses, police officers and veterans who simply wanted to secure their retirement. They have suffered significant losses, while the real wrongdoers—those who broke the rules, the advisors, the enablers, the facilitators—are not being held accountable or blamed at all. It’s purely the victims being blamed on top of enduring a decade of stress, health issues, endless meetings, legal and tax expert fees, and all sorts of other financial losses. We have victims in our group who are now battling homelessness and have lost their homes because of this situation. They have lost everything. They are clearly not in a better position than those who haven’t accessed their pensions early. Q: How does this issue extend beyond pension fraud victims? Sue Flood: This issue is far broader than just pension fraud. It’s about how the UK treats victims of fraud in general. Fraudsters don’t discriminate; victims come from all walks of life. For instance, footballers who were defrauded into film schemes have lost everything they worked for—their earnings, their pensions, their financial security. The same applies to those duped and scammed in other schemes, whether it’s self-assessment returns or the loan charge. I’d also like to make the point that just because someone was not financially knowledgeable, or a professional does not mean they should be penalized for being tricked by skilled fraudsters. I say this because we have victims who were professional advisors in Fraud Victims United who were scammed themselves. My message to all victims is that it doesn’t matter who you are, what scheme you were in, or what you did for a living. You are a human being, and your life matters. We are campaigning for fair and appropriate treatment for everyone affected. It could happen to anyone, and everyone deserves justice and support, not blame and unjust penalties. Q: What motivated you to form the Fraud Victims Alliance , and what is its mission? Sue Flood: Witnessing the profound suffering of these victims, being desperately afraid of the suicide risk and because of the glaring lack of support and justice they have faced. Alongside Carly Barnes Short, a lawyer who has also tirelessly advocated for victims for over a decade, we established the Investment & Pension Fraud Victim Alliance. Our mission is to support not only victims of historical fraud but also to protect current and future pensioners and investors. We aim to: Campaign for fair treatment for historical victims still grappling with the fallout from these schemes. Advocate for an amnesty for victims and a suspension of harsh HMRC enforcement actions. Push for an inquiry into how such extensive harm could occur and prevent future incidents. Lobby for legal changes to protect individuals from similar frauds in the future. Q: How does Fraud Victims United intend to help beyond addressing historical cases? Sue Flood: Our team is dedicated to more than just historical cases. We aim to safeguard current and future pensioners and investors from falling victim to similar schemes. The emphasis should be on preventing deception and bad behaviour, supporting those who have fallen victim to recover and rebuild, and dealing with the perpetrators who broke the rules and regulations. We want to ensure that the focus is on tackling the root causes and providing proper support to those affected, rather than penalising victims. Q: What message do you have for those in positions of power and for potential supporters? Sue Flood: To those in power and in government, I plead with you to recognise the immense suffering of these victims as a result of top down systemic failures in these cases. The victims have endured years of hardship and deserve justice and support. Please stop HMRC persecuting these victims and find a fair solution so that everybody can move on with their shattered lives and try to rebuild. For potential supporters, your involvement can make a significant difference. Together, we can advocate for those affected, push for necessary reforms, and ensure that no one else has to endure such devastation. Fraud Victims Alliance stands as a beacon of hope for a fairer, more just system, and we are committed to making that vision a reality.