Corporate report

Appointed Person for England and Wales: 2024 to 2025 report (accessible)

Published 21 May 2026

Applies to England and Wales

Presented to Parliament pursuant to section 291(5) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 and Article 17H of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (External Requests and Orders) Order 2005

May 2026

© Crown copyright 2026

This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3.

Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.

This publication is available at www.gov.uk/official-documents.

Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at:

homelandsecuritycriminalfinancesandassetrecoveryunit@homeoffice.gov.uk

ISBN 978-1-5286-6519-3 E03611735 05/26

Printed on paper containing 40% recycled fibre content minimum

Printed in the UK by HH Associates Ltd. on behalf of the Controller of His Majesty’s Stationery Office

Report of the Appointed Person for England and Wales under sections 47I, 291, 303F and 303Z24 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 and under article 17H of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (External Requests and Orders) Order 2005 (the “2005 Order”) for the period 1 April 2024 until 31 March 2025.

The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA)

This legislation was enacted to empower police and other law enforcement agencies to investigate, search and seize the apparent assets obtained by persons and organisations by criminal activity. Assets include cash, realisable property and “listed assets” (e.g. precious metals). Recovery procedures include, inter alia, confiscation upon a criminal conviction, forfeiture, freezing of accounts and real property, taxation and civil recovery from persons not convicted in the courts. The assets may not be evidence related to criminal charges. The act includes anti-money laundering legislation.

POCA 2002 (External Requests and Orders) Order 2005

This Statutory Order was made under Sections 444 and 459(2) of POCA. Generally, it provides powers for the freezing of property which may be needed to satisfy requests from other countries for the recovery of criminal assets. It also enables registration and enforcement of overseas confiscation orders. The powers and obligations are similar to those for search and seizure for domestic investigations.

The Appointed Person

This is the person who has been appointed to oversee those circumstances where the exercise of these powers by appropriate officers has been carried out without judicial authority pursuant to POCA sections 47H, 290, 303E, and 303Z23; and article 17F of the 2005 Order, even though a superior officer gave approval. The Appointed Person must be independent and not be employed under, or for the purposes of, any government department.

An appropriate officer must file a written report to the Appointed Person where assets are seized but not detained for more than 48 hours and where no assets are seized. The report must set out why they believed

the powers were exercisable and why it was not practicable to obtain prior judicial approval. In accordance with the Code of Practice, the report should be made as soon as practicable and, in all cases, within 14 days.

The Appointed Person must file an annual report with the Secretary of State, giving their opinion as to the circumstances and manner in which these powers were exercised without judicial approval. The report may make any recommendations the Appointed Person considers appropriate.

Searches and seizures

The act sets out very detailed requirements before an appropriate officer can carry out searches for and seizures of assets. It has been amended and added to on many occasions since 2002 by widening and strengthening the powers afforded to such officers. The original act provided for search and seizure of cash (which is widely defined) but now includes defined realisable property, listed assets and cryptoasset-related items. It excludes items required by the owner for work or domestic living purposes. Searches may be of a person, on premises or (under strict conditions) a vehicle.

Searches must be authorised in advance by a Justice of the Peace or, if one is not available, by a senior officer of a specific rank above that of the searching officer. However, as stated above, circumstances may arise in an investigation where, practicably, neither authority can be obtained.

Similar provisions are contained in articles 17A-17S of the Statutory Order for external requests.

If apparent assets are seized and are to be detained, with or without judicial approval for the search, an application must be brought before a court for their continued detention within 48 hours of the seizure. Consequently, there is judicial oversight thereafter for a maximum of two years.

Appropriate officers

These are defined under section 47A (for realisable property) as an officer of HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC), an immigration officer, a constable, a Serious Fraud Office officer and an accredited financial investigator (AFI). Officers of the National Crime Agency who are designated to have the powers of one or more of a constable, officer of HMRC, immigration officer or general customs official or who are accredited financial investigators are included.

Sections 289 and 291 (for recovery of cash) and sections 303C and 303J (for listed assets) authorise those same officers, except immigration officers, to exercise the powers of search and seizure. Section 303Z21, which was introduced via the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023, also extends these powers to cryptoasset-related items. Although not called ‘appropriate officers’ in those sections, this report will use that term for convenience.

The provisions of sections 303B-J came into force on 16 April 2018, having been enacted by the Criminal Finances Act 2017.

External requests and orders

Provisions are made for similar search and seizure powers and reporting to the Appointed Person under the statutory order mentioned above. Immigration officers are excluded.

Reports received during the period 1 April 2024 until 31 March 2025

During this period, I received seven reports of police searches under sections 47C-F and 289, for which prior judicial approval had not been obtained. In all cases except two, authority from a senior officer had been obtained before any searches and any seizures were carried out.

In the first case, a senior officer gave authority for the seizure of items of wealth which were found in premises being searched under a warrant granted under section 8 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE). Within the mandatory time of 48 hours, a successful application was made to a Magistrates Court for a detention order for two years. However, no charges had been brought within those two years and, because sufficient evidence had not been provided, no application was made to the court for an extension. No authority from a senior officer was made. The suspect was still under investigation for drugs supply and money laundering. The seized items were then treated as potential evidence under the provisions of PACE upon the lapse of the detention order.

In the second case, intelligence was received two hours before the departure of a plane to Spain on which an intended passenger was suspected to be carrying a substantial amount of cash which would be handed over in Spain to a person suspected of and wanted for drug dealing in the UK. There was insufficient time to make application to a court, so a senior officer authorised the search of the intended passenger. It was then found that the passenger was accompanied by another person bound for the flight and so again authority was granted for that person’s search. No cash or other property was found.

The third case involved a search for drugs in a property under section 8 of PACE. The search revealed a large amount of cash and items of wealth including watches, designer clothing and footwear. Authority for seizure of these items under section 47 of POCA was obtained from a senior officer. Police did not suspect such items and cash would have been in the possession of the suspect at that property, so no application had been made to a court.

Another case also involved the unsuspected large amount of cash and items of value found on premises when a search was conducted for drugs in the early morning. At 7.00am, the cash and valuables were found. A senior officer gave authority under section 47 of POCA at 7.15am. No court was available at that time.

A fifth case arose out of a Section 18 of PACE search which can be authorised by a senior officer soon after an arrest of a person for an indictable offence. Two police officers observed two persons leaving the premises while the authority to search the same premises was awaited. The persons were carrying a shoe box and a rucksack. They were evasive when questioned. The officers believed that they may have been carrying criminal property. They were detained and authority for a Section 289 search was given a few minutes later. Various items of potential evidence were found in the box and rucksack but no cash or items of value. This was a spontaneous event for which prior court approval was not possible.

The sixth case was the second case in which a senior officer’s authority was not obtained prior to seizure under section 47 of POCA of jewellery, cash and valuable clothing by officers searching property on foot of a PACE warrant for evidence of drugs. No application was made to a court for a retention order. The suspect pleaded guilty to various offences and a confiscation order was to be sought.

The seventh and final case involved a selection of drugs being imported by post. Police investigated the various addresses of the recipients and found that one person was the real recipient. Upon executing a search warrant at one property, a very large amount of cash and designer items were found along with substantial quantities of various drugs. A second address was also searched with similar items found. A senior officer authorised the seizure in both cases. It was not suspected that such potential evidence would be found at those addresses so no application for judicial authority was made in advance.

As stated above, an application must be made to a magistrates ’court within 48 hours for the continued detention of the assets otherwise they must be returned.

As outlined above, five of the seizures this year had received senior officer approval from an inspector or more senior rank, as required in the absence of prior judicial approval. I am satisfied that prior judicial approval could not be obtained in each of those cases. In the other two cases, the items seized were retained under PACE legislation and would have been dealt with in the course of a trial.

Having carefully considered the details of each case, I am satisfied that all appropriate officers used their powers reasonably and appropriately and that the criteria required for justifying the searches were met.

Commentary

Some may consider that seven cases in one year is a low number. However, it must be borne in mind that almost all searches under POCA will be well prepared in advance and based on sound evidence, information and intelligence. Such planned searches, some of which may not have prior judicial approval because of urgency, will usually result in seizures which are notified to the court within 48 hours. They do not need to be reported to the Appointed Person as the destiny of the assets seized will be decided upon by the court.

As outlined in the cases above, officers commence a search for drugs or other evidence under a PACE warrant which results in the discovery of assets including cash, vehicles, tobacco or other assets of which the officers had no knowledge.

In addition, police and other agencies can often use the provisions of PACE (sections 8,18 and 19) and the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (section 23) to search for evidence which they may seize if it is relevant to the investigation.

Recommendations

Following my recommendation in my 2021/2022 report, the Home Office designed a standardised form with guidance notes for use by all the police constabularies and other enforcement agencies for these reports. Some of the reports this year were delivered using the form, but I recommend that use of the standard form should be made by all those reporting.

In addition, the precise section of the legislation used for searches and seizures needs to be more clearly indicated on the standard form. That was not always indicated in the reports this year.

Greg McCourt

Appointed Person

30th May 2025

E03611735 978-1-5286-6519-3