A Lichfield woman has been ordered to pay back more than £50,000 put in her bank account by mistake.

The money – which totalled £51,821.34 was meant to be paid to Bromford Housing Association by Lichfield District Council but an error meant it went to Michaela Elaine Hutchings instead.

Stafford Crown Court was told that in just two days the 23-year-old spent £5,000 on Gucci, Louis Vuitton, Ralph Lauren and Dior goods, while another £1,000 went on paying off court fines and the same amount was given to her family. She also transferred the remaining £40,000 to a newly-opened savings account.

Hutchings was arrested on April 25 for theft and charged on September 15 with dishonestly retaining a wrongful credit.

Police recovered all but two of the designer items she bought, while the cash gift was recovered and a freeze was put on her bank accounts.

A Staffordshire Police spokesperson added: “Enquiries were then made with HM Courts and Tribunal Service and the monies paid to cover her court fines were recovered, too.

“Unfortunately the designer goods could not be returned to the retailers because the debit card used to purchase them was not recovered.”

Hutchings was convicted of dishonestly retaining a wrongful credit on January 10 2014 and on March 28 was sentenced to a 12 month supervision order with 150 hours unpaid work.

And the confiscation hearing at Stafford Crown Court yesterday (June 24) ordered her to pay £51,006.55 – the total of the recovered funds and the retail value of the clothing.

“The clothing and accessories will now be sold at auction in order to help pay the Confiscation Order,” a police spokesperson added.

“Hutchings was given six months to satisfy the Order or serve a default sentence of 20 months.”

Founder of Lichfield Live and editor of the site.

15 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Joe atherstone
9 years ago

I’d take them to court for distress caused by incorrectly credited funds. Pay them back by all means but to punish her for keeping them or expect her to pay costs is just wrong. It was their error, they should pay. If she didn’t know she was doing wrong by keeping the money how can she be guilty.

FiveSpiresLive
9 years ago

“Hutchings was convicted of dishonestly retaining a wrongful credit on January 10 2014 ”
Do the police need a confiscation order to return funds from a frozen account, or could they be returned immediately with the cooperation of the account holder? This is the point that needs clarification before everyone gets excited.

Joe atherstone
9 years ago

That’s a good point. Maybe she hasn’t co-operated. There’s got to be more to it than we’ve been told. I just don’t see the point in fining someone when the housing association caused the situation themselves by putting the money in. They should pay the costs, it was their mistake, they should take responsibility for their mistakes as much as she should be punished for breaking the law.

johnthemon
9 years ago

Oh yes “Lichfield District Council” and how much more money has been lost because of “error” lost, gone without trace?

A Cynical Parody
9 years ago

Joe: I have a friend who helped to run an overseas bank. He has spirited away some of the funds from that bank after its assets were seized by a corrupt government. If you give me your account details I’ll arrange for him to transfer the funds to your account, you take a 20% cut then pass the rest on to him. We’re talking quite a significant sum here. Its totally free money. Go on. Do it.

She committed fraud. Pure and simple.
Yes, a mistake was made. So what?
It was obvious the money wasn’t meant for her and yet she happily started to spend, spend, spend straight away as if it was totally free money for just her.
Naive? Yes. Criminal? Yes.

But, honestly, my overseas banking associate really does have totally free money available if you give me your account details.
Go on.
Do it.

Rob
9 years ago

Just as well she started by spending the money on essentials, or it could have been viewed as bad taste.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2669404/Single-mother-went-shopping-spree-council-mistakenly-50-000-bank-account-pay-prison.html

Joe atherstone
9 years ago

I agree but my point is that she’s being punished for spending it when the fact is that she’s have not been able to commit the crime if the housing association had been more careful with its money.

Look at it another way, if I walk into Lichfield city centre with 51 thousand quid in my pocket and it’s falling out as I walk and being picked up by people,would you really expect all of those people to be fined for picking it and keeping it.
Morally it’s wrong and I usually hand in money I find, but it would be as much my fault for being careless with it. I’d like it back, I wouldn’t expect people to be fined or threatened with prison.
You lot obviously see it differently to me. I prefer to spend court time and prison sentences on real criminals

A Cynical Parody
9 years ago

So, can I have your bank account details for my overseas associate or not?

Darryl
9 years ago

I have some sympathy.

She pleaded guilty and the majority of the money was recovered. The court has placed an unfair requirement on her and there is a good chance she will serve a prison term. For what purpose?

Is it unreasonable to consider that she was naive? Ignorance of the law is no defence, but mitigating circumstances are always a factor.

The fact is we, as a society, place more value in money than we do in, say, feeding the hungry or housing the homeless. Unfortunately she’s paying the price for being greedy and a little stupid.

In my mind a caution and suspended sentence would have been appropriate and the council should swallow the cost for their own stupid mistake. Has there been disciplinary action at the council for failing to protect our money with the vociferousness that they are pursuing this woman?

Cynic
9 years ago

Look at what the law states about such cases – then look at the collective comments on the site – what does it say about the honesty of those posters?

If a lot of you do feel sorry for he – just send her a few pounds to pay her expenses.

A Cynical Parody
9 years ago

That money could have been used to pay back us tax-payers who have to fork out for things such as the Garrick and other unnecessary luxuries for toffs to enjoy. Who is actually being robbed here, eh..huh…mmmm???

Darryl
9 years ago

@cynic

Read it as you will, it’s more about reasonableness of the sentence. If she can’t pay the money back, what is the point of sending her to prison? Prison costs on average £45,000 per prison per year. It’s a ludicrously inefficient form of punishment.

They will fail to recover the money and incur more costs. If an asset seizure order under the proceeds of crime act isn’t going to recover the money then neither is sending her to prison.

I’m sure she has learn’t a very harsh lesson.

Fuzzy yarn
9 years ago

At the end of the day, she should have been honest! Phoned the council and said that there was an error etc etc but no! Her selfishness Got there first.
She should pay back every penny outright with interest and court fees!
Bring her out of jail to do the bin collections for more than 150 hours as that’s not enough of a penalty for being a liar and thief as well as her partner ‘helping’ her to spend it.
Nothing to do with the council making an error, that’s by the by !

Joe atherstone
9 years ago

have the Association not taken responsibility for their mistake yet and done the decent thing of paying the court fees