• False Creek at night

Our Successes

Theft & Fraud

R. v. Q.C. – Insurance Fraud Investigation

Charge: Insurance fraud over $5000 investigation.

Issue: Given our client’s rehabilitation and repayment of disputed funds, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to persuade the Insurance company to settle the matter on a civil basis. No criminal charhges were forwarded. No criminal record.

R. vs. A.S. – North Vancouver Provincial Court

Charges: Fraud Over $5,000 (x4); Theft Over $5,000 (x4).

Issue: Given that full restitution was made and that our client had taken significant steps toward self-rehabilitation, whether jail was the appropriate sentence for this $240,000 employee fraud.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to facilitate the restitution payment and provided medical information to Crown counsel on our client’s behalf. Ultimately Mr. Mines persuaded Crown to  jointly  recommend a non-custodial sentence. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, our client was granted a 2 year less a day conditional senntence.. No jail.

R. vs. C.C. – Insurance Fraud Investigation

Charges: Fraud Over $5,000 Investigation.

Issue: Given that we were able to negotiate a civil settlement of this $6,000 insurance claim overpayment, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to negotiate a settlement of the alleged fraudulent claim. We obtained a full Release, ending the matter. No further liability. No criminal charges were forwarded.

R. vs. A.J. – Insurance Fraud Investigation

Charges: Fraud Over $5,000 Investigation.

Issue: Given that we were able to negotiate a civil settlement of this $13,000 insurance claim overpayment, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to negotiate a settlement of the alleged fraudulent claim. We obtained a full Release, ending the matter in both the civil and criminal context. No further liability. No criminal charges.

R. vs. C.T. – Insurance Fraud Investigation

Charges: Fraud Under $5,000.

Issue: Given our client’s repayment of the alleged fraudulent health insurance benefits, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with criminal charges.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to settle the matter civilly on our client’s behalf without any further civil or criminal proceeding. No charges were approved.

R. v. K.T. – Insurance Fraud Investigation

Charges: Fraud Under $5000.

Issue: Given our client’s repayment of the alleged fraudulent health insurance benefit claims, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with criminal charges.

Result: Mr. Mines was able settle the matter on our client’s behalf and received a Release from the insurer ending the matter without any further civil or criminal proceeding. No charges were approved.

B.G. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Theft/Fraud Over $5000 (from employer).

Issue: Given the self rehabilitation and civil settlement made by our client, whether a non-custodial sentence was appropriate in this $60,000 theft from employer case.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to persuade the Court that the appropriate sentence was an 18 month community-based sentence with 6 months of house arrest. No jail.

R. vs. S.L. – Insurance Fraud Investigation

Charge: Fraud Over $5000.

Issue: Given our client’s settlement of the fraud claim by paying funds back on a “without prejudice” basis, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to persuade the investigator to not forward any report for charge assessment. No charges were approved. No criminal record.

R. vs. E.E. and B.L. – Insurance Fraud Investigation

Charges: Fraud; misrepresentation.

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal investigation and prosecution.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to negotiate a civil settlement on our clients’ behalf resulting in an end to the matter. No police investigation. No criminal record.

R. vs. G.P. – New Westminster Provincial Court

Charge: Theft Under $5000 (from employer).

Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps we were able to guide our client through, whether it was contrary to the public interest for the court to grant our client a conditional discharge.

Result: Crown counsel’s position was that our client should be sentenced to jail but after considering our client’s positive pre-sentence report and Mr. Mines’ submissions on our client’s behalf, the court granted a conditional dischege. No criminal conviction.

R. v. G.K. – Fort St. John Provincial Court

Charge: Theft/ Fraud Over $5000 (from employer).

Issue: Whether Crown could prove the alleged $300,000 offence and, given the rehabilitative steps that we were able to guide our client through, whether a jail sentence was necessary.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to persuade Crown counsel that they could only prove that our client was responsible for a $74,000 theft. Further, despite the breach of trust, in this case, Mr. Gauthier was able to persuade Crown counsel to seek a conditional sentence, rather than jail. After hearing Mr. Gauthier’s submissions, the court sentenced our client to a 2 year conditional sentence. No jail.

R. vs. F.K. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charges: Theft and Fraud Over $5000 (from employer).

Issue: Whether the pre-charge delay of 3.5 years would reduce the sentence in this $215,000 employee fraud case.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade the trial judge and Crown counsel that there was merit to our application for a judicial stay of proceedings based on our client’s inability to properly defend the charges due to a delay of about 4 years in getting the charges approved. Notwithstanding this breach of trust, Mr. Mines was able to negotiate a plea arrangement in which our client received a 2 year conditional sentence order with a 10 pm curfew for 12 months. No monies were ordered to be repaid. No jail.