UK Police Recover $671,000 in Stolen Crypto Under Proceeds of Crime Act

UK police recovered approximately $671,000 (£520,000) in crypto that was fraudulently obtained from an 80-year-old man, in what lawyers involved with the retrieval are describing as a British first under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

Working in collaboration with legal firms Edmonds Marshall McMahon and 5SAH, as well as professional services company Grant Thornton, police were able to trace the misappropriated crypto via wallet addresses supplied by the victim, known only as Mr A.

They made legal use of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, which in October 2023 was amended to include a new, crypto-related section, enabling victims of cryptocurrency fraud to apply for the release of funds from wallets on which freezing orders have been placed.

Mr A had sent upwards of 9.1 BTC to fraudsters posing as exchange operators, with authorities able to establish that the Bitcoin had been converted into USDT by the perpetrators and sent on to an account with an “overseas exchange.”

Based on this information, a UK court ordered the repatriation of the defrauded crypto under the terms of the amended Proceeds of Crime Act.

Speaking to Decrypt, Ashley Fairbrother—a partner at London-based Edmonds Marshall McMahon—explained that it was the manner in which the assets were recovered that makes the case “groundbreaking” from a British legal perspective.

“Recent legislation under the Proceeds of Crime Act, specifically section 303Z51, empowers the Police to issue crypto wallet freezing orders,” he said. “Once in place, this allows victims to apply for the recovery of stolen assets once such orders are in place.”

At least $7.7 million (£6 million) in misbegotten crypto has now been retrieved by British police using the new crypto freezing orders, according to data from the HM Courts & Tribunals Service.

Fairbrother also explained that the process of retrieval operates within a civil regime but in criminal courts, which is unusual for the UK and which also means it requires lawyers with “very particular expertise” to execute properly.

In his view, the “legislation is a significant step forward—an innovative legal framework that streamlines the asset recovery process, provided there is constructive cooperation between the Police and victims.”

However, this is where challenges can arise, given that police forces in the UK can be uncertain about how much support to provide to victims beyond specific criminal investigations.

“But if  the Police are willing to collaborate closely with victims and their legal representatives, as was the case here, this new legislation could be the silver bullet to addressing cross-border crypto fraud on a much larger scale in this country,” Fairbrother added.

In fact, Fairbrother states that Edmonds Marshall McMahon expects the retrieval of misappropriated crypto to become more routine in the UK.

He said, “given the unique nature of blockchain public distributed ledgers, it can actually be easier to recover crypto assets compared to traditional fiat asset recovery.”

Yet “significant” legislative work may be needed in order to facilitate more cooperation between the police and victims, while Fairbrother also suggests that forces would benefit from “the creation of dedicated cyber pursuit teams.”

Despite these challenges, Fairbrother is optimistic that this recent case marks the opening of a new phase in crypto law enforcement in the UK.

He said, “With more resources and a dedicated team in place, along with clear guidance, this could be a major catalyst for improving recovery efforts and making it a more routine part of the process.”

Edited by Stacy Elliott.