Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting TANEWS to 80360, or email
Little Horton property crook told to pay £140,000
A crooked Bradford property developer has been ordered by a Court to stump up £140,000 of his ill-gotten gains.
Mohammed Alyas, 45, of Seldon Street, Little Horton, was jailed for three years four months for conspiracy to defraud in 2007.
He tried to illegally obtain ownership of four properties in the Bradford and Halifax areas and sell them on.
Alyas succeeded in registering his name to one of the properties which he sold for £100,000.
Following a two-day confiscation hearing at Bradford Crown Court, he has been given three months to pay back £140,000 or face a further two years and three months in jail.
Two victims of Alyas’s fraudulent activities are to be compensated for their losses.
After the hearing, Temporary Detective Chief Inspector Fran Naughton, of the force’s Economic Crime Unit, said: “Alyas would submit false and forged documentation to the Land Registry Office in order to obtain ownership of properties. He sold two properties on to unsuspecting developers and made £140,000 as a result.
“I am delighted that Alyas has been forced to pay back his ill-gotten gains and that his victims have been compensated.”
The homes scam used forged documents to try to snap up derelict and empty houses by cheating the owners out of their legal rights of ownership.
Alyas, a property developer and builder, was at the head of the large-scale fraud - the first of its kind ever seen by investigating police.
Sentencing him more than four years ago, Judge Roger Scott said: “You would pull any stroke available to you to obtain title dishonestly. You used false documents and took advantage of the vulnerable.
“You failed twice and you succeeded twice, although the Land Registry transferred the title back again once they found out what happened.”
In April, 2009, Alyas failed in a legal bid to halt the confiscation process under the Proceeds of Crime Act by trying to exploit a clerical error.
His barrister claimed the hearing had been discontinued, saying the Crown wrote to the court requesting that the timetable be withdrawn administratively. The judge ruled that the process could still go ahead.