​KembaraXtra-Case Law- Preddy (1996) HL - Property Belonging to Another

• Case Overview: D obtained mortgage loans through deception involving false statements in applications. Payments were made via cheques and CHAPS. D was convicted of obtaining property by deception and appealed.

Key Issue: What constitutes "property belonging to another" when electronic transfers are involved?

• The Argument: D argued that electronic transfers didn't involve the transfer of identifiable property.

Held: No Transfer of Identifiable Property in Electronic Transfers

• Ruling: The House of Lords agreed with D.
  • When payment is made via electronic transfer:
    • No identifiable property is transferred from the payer to the payee.
    • The payer's credit balance is extinguished.
    • A new chose in action (right to sue) is created in the payee's account.
• Implication:
  • D obtained mortgage advances by deception, but this did not contravene s 15 of the Theft Act 1968 (obtaining property by deception).
  • The deception did not result in D obtaining "property belonging to another"

Aftermath: Appeals Based on Preddy

• Note: The Preddy judgment led to appeals from other defendants convicted under s 15 for similar mortgage frauds.