On Tuesday 1 November 2022, Bradford Magistrates’ Court found Usman Raees guilty in his absence of failing to provide information to the Security Industry Authority (SIA).
The court fined him £660 and ordered him to pay £3,814 court costs plus a £66 victim surcharge within 28 days.
This week’s case follows a successful prosecution by the Security Industry Authority (SIA) in December 2020, when Mr Raees was prosecuted for failing to supply information to the SIA despite repeated requests.
Mr Raees was the sole company director of Bluesec Services Group Ltd for a very short period at the end of November 2017. The SIA later received information about irregular company practices at Bluesec Services. The SIA sought further information from Mr Raees, who held a non front-line licence. SIA investigators wrote to Mr Raees on 16 September 2019 and sent subsequent follow-up letters to which he failed to respond.
Early in 2021 Mr Raees claimed that he had just discovered that he had been prosecuted in his absence. He requested that his case be reopened. The case was heard on Tuesday, yet he once again failed to appear. In his continued absence, the court found him guilty and awarded the full costs to the SIA.
Mark Chapman, one of the SIA’s criminal investigations managers, said: This is the second time the court has found the case proven against Mr Raees. He is a former company director who now has a criminal record and is unlikely to ever hold an SIA licence again. The role of the SIA is to protect the public. We actively pursue investigations where there are suspicions that dubious practices are being carried out. Failure to supply information to our investigators when requested is an offence. As in this case such actions most often lead to prosecution. The fine and the costs reflect the view the court takes on a refusal to engage with the private security industry regulator.