Free Newsletter
Register for our Free Newsletters
Newsletter
Zones
Access Control
LeftNav
Alarms
LeftNav
Biometrics
LeftNav
Detection
LeftNav
Deutsche Zone (German Zone)
LeftNav
Education, Training and Professional Services
LeftNav
Government Programmes
LeftNav
Guarding, Equipment and Enforcement
LeftNav
Industrial Computing Security
LeftNav
IT Security
LeftNav
Physical Security
LeftNav
Surveillance
LeftNav
View All
Other Carouselweb publications
Carousel Web
Defense File
New Materials
Pro Health Zone
Pro Manufacturing Zone
Pro Security Zone
Web Lec
 
ProSecurityZone Sponsor
 
ProSecurityZone Sponsor
 
ProSecurityZone Sponsor
 
ProSecurityZone Sponsor
 
ProSecurityZone Sponsor
 
ProSecurityZone Sponsor
 
 
News

Guard company fined for illegal activities

Security Industry Authority : 21 May, 2013  (Company News)
Scarlet Security fined in courts for using illegal immigrant on workforce and for carrying out security operations without a licence
Guard company fined for illegal activities

A Peterborough based security company has been found guilty of illegally supplying a security guard to work on a construction site and ordered to pay more than £30,000.

On 16th May at Norwich Crown Court, Scarlet Security Limited was fined £3,000 and order to pay full costs of £31,347.98.

In November 2011, after intelligence reports of illegal activity were received, Scarlet Security Limited, based in Stuart House, St John Street, Peterborough, was investigated by Security Industry Authority investigators, who were supported by Norfolk and Cambridgeshire Police and the UKBA.

As a result of the investigation an employee of the company was found to be working illegally, without an SIA licence. Further, the individual was arrested, referred to the UKBA and subsequently deported as he did not have the right to remain in the UK.

Scarlet Security Limited elected to have the case heard in Crown Court, where the court heard that the owner of the company was a Ken Washington and its former Director a Caroline Kariuki.  However, at trial the company was not represented and no defence to the indictment was presented to the jury.

In sentencing the company, Recorder Rupert Lowe stated that he was satisfied that the deported individual “had worked for the company for some time,” and acknowledged the importance of the case as the offence “undermines the regulatory framework and immigration system.”

Head of Investigation Nathan Salmon said: “The prosecution of Scarlet Security is a reminder that some businesses continue to supply individuals to work in the private security industry unlicensed.

“The company was not undertaking adequate vetting of its staff as it claimed it had done. It is a concern for the regulator that the individual worked in the industry although he did not have the right to remain in the UK.
 
“We were unable to engage with persons in control of the business at the time of the offence which has frustrated proceedings; however, this verdict is very positive.

“Although the individuals running Scarlet Security have decided to liquidate the business, the SIA felt it important to progress this prosecution as taking such a course of action should not be a protection against prosecution. I am thankful to our partners in this investigation.”

Bookmark and Share
 
Home I Editor's Blog I News by Zone I News by Date I News by Category I Special Reports I Directory I Events I Advertise I Submit Your News I About Us I Guides
 
   © 2012 ProSecurityZone.com
Netgains Logo