Hidden fortune came from betting, court told

Between 2003 and last year, more than £200,000 was paid into accounts in the name of George Stott or which came within his control, Andrew Hatton prosecuting told Leeds Crown Court.

In four of those years Stott declared no earnings at all to the taxman while in the other two years, the total earnings declared amounted to only £33,600, he said.

Stott had given no explanation at the time to account for around £100,000 which appeared to come from unknown sources, £60,000 going into his accounts and £38,600 deposited into the account of a woman with whom he was having a relationship.

That was paid in to accounts in West Yorkshire when she or both of them were abroad.

During that period there was also “considerable expenditure on expensive motor cars, jewellery and exotic travel” and Stott withdrew only a modest amount in cash for day-to-day expenses.

“The crown say that is an indication of a lavish lifestyle funded by an income from an illegitimate source” said Mr Hatton.

But Simon Batiste, representing Stott, told the court it was not the usual money laundering case; the explanation for the money was that Stott had been in effect an unlicensed bookmaker who had avoided paying tax.

“He had a number of friends and associates, often relatively high stake gamblers, some of whom found it easier to gamble with him, perhaps he gave them better odds.”

Mr Batiste said Stott was successful in that and should be dealt with only the basis he had cost the revenue about £14,000 in gambling duty and not for some more series criminality.

Stott, 45 of Stone Brig Lane, Rothwell, Leeds, who admitted one charge of converting criminal property and one of conspiracy to convert criminal property was given a 12-month prison sentenced suspended for two years with supervision and 240 hours of unpaid work.

The Recorder of Leeds, Judge Peter Collier QC said the prosecution could not put forward another explanation for the money, around £100,000 paid in to his or accounts in his control.

“Your explanation for it is that it was from dealing as an unlicensed bookmaker and allowing people to gamble with you and to that extent the Crown has lost tax.”

He told Stott “whatever my suspicions may be” about where the money was coming from, he was having to deal with him on that basis.

The judge said that meant Stott being dealt with for a fraud on the tax man which brought it into a lower amount for sentencing purposes.