Section 2 -Fraud

Actus Reus- D makes a representation which they know to be false

Section 2 (3) says that D's representation can be about 1/3 things -Fact -Statements of Law -State of mindSection 2 (4) gives different ways in which D can make a representationi) express representations - words written or spokenR v Silverman - D, a plumber gave the victims really high quotation. There was 'mutual trust'. He had deceived them of the true cost and the profit he would makeii) implied representations - by conduct DPP v Ray - D left a restaurant without paying. He waited for the waiter to leave before he leftR v Lambie - D exceeded the limits on the credit card. She was asked to give it back ,she continued to use the card and bought clothes iii) implied representations by clothingR v Barnard - D entered a shop in Oxford wearing the clothing of a student. He also said that he was to get the goods on credit iii) representations by omissionR v Rai - Made application to council for an adapted bathroom for his mother. She later died. D failed to inform the council so they carried out the workSection 2 (5) Representation can be made against a machine Representation must be false - s 2(2) meaning untrue or misleading

Mens Rea- Knowledge that the representation is or might be false, dishonestly with an intention to make again for himself or another or intention to cause/expose another to a risk of loss

Knowing representation may be falseDishonesty Ghosh- Legal principleD's conduct would be considered dishonest by the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people.D was aware that reasonable and honest people would consider his behaviour to be honest Gain or lossSection 5 of the Fraud Act defines;Gain: Keeping what one has or getting what one has notLoss: Parting with what one already has or not getting what one might otherwise getDPP v Stonehouse - Faked his own death in order for his wife to get his life insurance policy. Intention to make a gain for another