Fraud (Fraud Act 2006)
Fraud under the Fraud Act 2006 is committed by dishonestly making a false representation, failing to disclose information you must disclose, or abusing a position of trust, intending to make a gain or cause a loss. No money actually has to change hands.
Law checked as at 25 September 2026. Legal information only, not legal advice, and not a prediction of any sentence.
At a glance
| Also known as | Fraud by false representation, Fraud by failing to disclose information, Fraud by abuse of position, Section 2 fraud |
|---|---|
| The law | Fraud Act 2006, section 1 |
| Where it is tried | either way. Smaller frauds are often dealt with in the magistrates' court, while larger or complex frauds go to the Crown Court. |
| Maximum penalty | 10 years' imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine (Fraud Act 2006, s.1(3)). In the magistrates' court the maximum for a single either-way offence is 12 months' imprisonment (Sentencing Act 2020, s.224). |
| Sentencing guideline | Sentencing Council: Fraud |
Maximum penalties are the most a court can impose for the worst cases. Most sentences are far lower, and the actual sentence depends on the facts, any guilty plea and the court's assessment.
What the prosecution must prove
- For false representation (s.2): the defendant made a representation of fact or law, including about their own state of mind, by words or conduct, including to a machine or online system.
- The representation was false (untrue or misleading) and the defendant knew it was, or might be, untrue or misleading.
- The defendant acted dishonestly, judged by the standards of ordinary decent people on the facts as they believed them to be.
- The defendant intended to make a gain for themselves or another, or to cause loss or expose another to a risk of loss.
- The other forms of fraud are failing to disclose information when under a legal duty to do so (s.3) and abuse of a position of financial trust (s.4).
Defences and common issues
- The representation was true, or the defendant genuinely believed it was true.
- No dishonesty, judged by the standards of ordinary decent people on the facts as the defendant believed them to be.
- No intention to make a gain or cause a loss.
- The defendant did not make the representation, for example because someone else used their account or card.
Frequently asked questions
What is fraud by false representation?
Fraud by false representation is dishonestly making a statement or implying something by your conduct that you know is, or might be, untrue or misleading, intending to make a gain or cause a loss (Fraud Act 2006, s.2). Examples include lying on an insurance claim, using someone else's bank card without permission, selling goods online that you never intend to send, or giving false details on an application. It can be committed face to face, in writing or online.
Do I have to have actually got any money to be guilty of fraud?
No. Fraud under the Fraud Act 2006 focuses on the dishonest conduct and intention, not the result. It is enough that you made the false representation, knowing it was or might be untrue, intending to make a gain or cause a loss. It does not matter whether anyone was actually deceived or lost money. However, the amount gained or lost, and the intended amount, are important in sentencing.
What are the different types of fraud?
The Fraud Act 2006 creates one general offence of fraud that can be committed in three ways: by false representation (s.2), by failing to disclose information you are under a legal duty to disclose (s.3), and by abuse of a position where you are expected to safeguard someone else's financial interests (s.4). There are also related offences, such as possessing or making articles for use in fraud and obtaining services dishonestly, and separate benefit fraud offences.
What is the maximum sentence for fraud?
The maximum sentence for fraud under the Fraud Act 2006 is 10 years' imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine. In the magistrates' court the maximum is 12 months. Sentences are based on the Sentencing Council fraud guideline, which considers the financial loss, harm to victims and the offender's role and planning. Courts can also make confiscation and compensation orders so that money is recovered.
Do I have to answer police questions if I am interviewed about fraud?
You do not have to answer police questions, and you have the right to free and independent legal advice at the police station at any time. However, in England and Wales a court may draw an adverse inference if you later rely on a fact in your defence that you could reasonably have mentioned in interview (Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, ss.34 to 38). Whether to answer questions, give a prepared statement or say 'no comment' is something a solicitor can advise on before the interview.
Official sources
Primary sources and official guidance on this topic, for anyone who wants to read the underlying rules directly.
Charged or under investigation? Ask LawBot a general question, or find a criminal defence solicitor near you.
Ask LawBot →