Private costs, public gains – the reality of SFO policy

Self reporting and civil recovery are appealingly pragmatic elements of the new Serious Fraud Office approach but they leave individual suspects more exposed, warns Neill Blundell of Eversheds.

Neill Blundell, Partner and Head of Fraud Group, Eversheds LLP (+44 (0) 845 497 4533, NeillBlundell@eversheds.com

The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has been undergoing a revolution in the way in which it deals with fraud investigations over the last 18 months. Many of these changes can be applauded. After all, Richard Alderman took the helm at the agency in April 2008, a time when the SFO was still reeling from several spectacular failures. These failures included the abandoned investigation into BAE in connection with the Al-Yamamah contracts with Saudi Arabia and the failed prosecution of the NHS price rigging case known as Operation Holbein. Many people were questioning whether the SFO could survive as it appeared incapable of tackling serious fraud cases and was attracting very unfavourable coverage in the press.