The sale of Hope Springs House marks a significant milestone in the UK’s use of Unexplained Wealth Orders (UWOs), with over £1.1 million recovered for the public purse. This is the first successful UWO recovery by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and only one of a handful of applications since the power was introduced under the Criminal Finances Act 2017.
The order was made against Claire Schools, the ex-wife of Timothy Schools, a former solicitor convicted in 2022 for orchestrating a £146 million fraud through the Cayman Islands-based Axiom Legal Financing Fund. Mr Schools was sentenced to 14 years in prison and admitted to transferring over £1 million to others, including Claire. She used some of these funds to purchase and renovate Hope Springs House, but was unable to provide a legitimate explanation for the source of the money.
UWOs are a relatively new legal tool that allow law enforcement agencies to compel individuals to explain how they acquired certain assets—typically high-value properties—when there is suspicion of criminal conduct. If the explanation is inadequate, the property can be seized.
The recovery of £1.1 million is a positive outcome but as the legal and investigative costs involved in securing such orders are not publicly disclosed, it is difficult to assess their overall value, and as enforcement agencies develop their tools and routes to recovery, fraudsters will continue to evolve their methods in hiding their assets and finding ways around the enforcement powers. However, the symbolic importance of this case is clear: it shows that associates and family members of fraudsters are not beyond reach and that UWOs are being used to recover proceeds of crime that might otherwise remain hidden.
That said, in this case, the UWO was not a silver bullet to substantial further recovery in that Mr Schools had misappropriated £146 million and the Court ensured information sought from Mrs Schools by the SFO was limited to legitimate questions about the property. The Court refused the request for information around Mrs Schools' early relationship with, and initial separation from, her ex-husband. It seems clear that the Court will limit questions to be asked of the Defendant to unexplained wealth rather than wider information gathering.
This case may not open the floodgates to widespread use of UWOs, but it does demonstrate that they are another useful tool to recover misappropriated funds and will hopefully serve as a deterrent.
