Former quiz contestant ordered to pay over £4 million under POCA
A man who came to fame in the UK after appearing on the quiz show ‘Who Wants to Be a Millionaire’ has been ordered to pay back more than £4 million of illicit gains after being jailed for a series of financial crimes.
Jeff Arundell was jailed for six-and-a-half years in 2023 after being convicted of offences including fraud and money laundering in relation to financial dealings he carried out in 2016 and 2017.
Having invited a friend to put money into what he claimed to be a “guaranteed money-making investment”, Arundell persuaded him and many of his family members that their investments were safe. In the belief that Arundell was a true friend, the investors gave him £108,000.
In December 2016, Arundell used their money to make numerous spread betting trades and told the investors within weeks that he had lost their money and did not have the funds to repay them despite his previous guarantees.
They reported him to the police in January 2017 and during its investigation it was found that Arundell had, contrary to what he had told the investors, in fact profited from some of the trades and placed further bets that had eventually netted him £4.6 million by August 2017.
At a Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA) hearing in December 2025, the Court found that the total from which Arundell had illegally benefited was £4.8 million, leading the Judge to issue a confiscation order against him for £4,140,428.59, of which more than £220,000 will go back to his victims. Arundell must pay this or be sentenced to a further eight years in jail.
Roger Isaacs, National Technical Director of NIFA, said, “In cases like this, the Court will have been advised of the ‘recoverable amount’, which is typically based on either the benefit gained from the criminal conduct or the assets available to meet the order, whichever is lower.
“In POCA proceedings, rather than applying a presumption of innocence, the burden of proof is on defendants to prove that they acquired their assets from legitimate sources of income
“What we frequently see is that the prosecution relies on assumptions about how funds were used, recycled or retained over time, particularly in cases involving trading or investment activity. Those assumptions can significantly increase the amount payable. Without a detailed forensic analysis reconstructing what happened to the money at each stage, individuals can find themselves facing confiscation orders that go far beyond the sums they believed were involved. While it is possible to contest POCA proceedings, any challenge to a confiscation order will need to be supported by accountancy evidence gathered through a detailed forensic analysis.”
Sources: BBC News
Share on Twitter
