Source: The Insolvency Service published on this website Monday 9 June 2025 by Jill Powell

A company which used high pressure sales tactics to sell service plans for household appliances has been shut down after an Insolvency Service investigation found it targeted the elderly and vulnerable.  

UK Service Plan Ltd, registered at Princess Street in Manchester and formerly Trafalgar Place, Brighton, offered protection plans for white goods to cover the cost of callouts, replacement parts and labour. 

The company charged around £29 a month for a service plan, and some people were persuaded to take on lengthy agreements of up to three and five years. 

Additionally, the company pressured people – some via cold calls – into buying plans by offering a discount which they falsely claimed was only applicable if they pay on the day. 

The Insolvency Service looked at 14 complaints which had been received from UK Service Plan Ltd customers, all of whom were over the age of 71.  

Seven of the complainants were described as being vulnerable, with variable memory recall and conditions including Alzheimer’s or dementia.  

Three were cold called despite being registered with the Telephone Preference Service. 

Six had direct debits set up apparently without their permission and three were told they were existing customers when they were not.  

Insolvency Service Chief Investigator Mark George said:  

“UK Service Plan Ltd targeted and pressured some of the most vulnerable people in our society.  They were persuaded into buying a service agreement, which it appears many did not want or need.    

“Being able to shut this company down is a vital step toward protecting the public from becoming victims of their bad business practices.”

The company was not represented at the hearing and did not defend the petition, with the company’s director – 41-year-old Mohamed Anoir Dhimi, of Manchester – giving an undertaking to the court not to be involved in the promotion, formation or management of any company whose business is in the same or a similar field for a period of eight years. 

Dhimi did not fully co-operate with the investigation and provided limited information to the Insolvency Service. 

As evidence of poor trading practice, between August 2021 and July 2022, it was found the company had paid more than £200,000 in refunds to 740 people.  

In 2022, the company claimed to have a turnover of more than two million pounds. 

But the recorded cash in the filed accounts did not match the balance in the known bank account at the relevant date. 

In addition, the company failed to maintain accurate records and accounts the company filed at Companies House contained potentially false information. 

UK Service Plan Ltd, incorporated in 2021, was last registered at an address on Princess Street in Manchester. It claimed to have 10 employees, but no actual trading address has been found.  

The company had previously been registered in London and Brighton. 

The Official Receiver has been appointed as liquidator of UK Service Plan Ltd.   

The Insolvency Service worked in collaboration with Trading Standards on the investigation. 

All enquiries concerning the affairs of the company should be made to the Official Receiver of Public Interest Unit: PO Box 16664, Birmingham, B2 2JQ. piu.or@insolvency.gov.uk. 

Source: Birmingham Safeguarding Children Partnership  published on this website Thursday 5 June 2025 by Jill Powell

Child Safeguarding Practice Review: Child A BSCP 2022-23/04 published 4 June 2025

Introduction and background to the review:

“This report sets out the findings and learning from a Child Safeguarding Practice Review (CSPR) that was commissioned by the Birmingham Safeguarding Children Partnership.

“A Rapid Review was triggered following information being provided to Birmingham Children’s Trust by Somerset Children’s Social Care in December 2022. This information highlighted that while Somerset Children’s Social Care were taking legal action to remove a three-month old child from parental care, the child’s parents disclosed that an older child of theirs had died around January 2020 whilst they were living in the Birmingham area, and that they had buried the child’s body in the garden of the property.

“West Midlands Police subsequently recovered a body; the age of the deceased child was thought to be between three and four years of age. The findings of the post-mortem are inconclusive in terms of both cause of death but also age at time of death.

“As part of the Rapid Review, it was confirmed that the father had a third child, aged five years, living in London with another female partner. To protect the anonymity of three children at the centre of this review, they have been given pseudonyms; the deceased child discovered in Birmingham will be known as Child A, the three-month old baby located in the Somerset area will be known as Sibling B, the five-year-old child living in the London area will be known as Sibling C. Given the circumstances in Somerset and significant harm suffered by Sibling B, alongside the suspicious circumstances surrounding Child A’s death, abuse and neglect of Child A could not be ruled out; therefore, based on statutory guidance the Partnership determined that a CSPR should be undertaken. West Midlands Police investigated Child A’s death; these investigations resulted in a criminal trial which concluded with both parents being found guilty of causing or allowing the death of a child as well as perverting the course of justice. The father was sentenced to 24½ years and his mother to 19½ years.

“The following relevant remarks were made by the sentencing Judge at the trial’s conclusion, and which places both Child A and Sibling B’s daily life in context, and help us appreciate Child A’s lived experience in the remaining months and weeks of his life: ‘… You wilfully neglected both of them in that you failed to provide them with adequate amounts of properly nutritious food and you failed to obtain necessary medical attention for them. Child A died as the result of your wilful neglect of him. Sibling B has been left with very significant health difficulties … that will require assistance and medical supervision for the rest of his life. … It is difficult to imagine a worse case of neglect than that which the court has encountered in your case. Your motivation for acting as you did was your prioritisation of your distorted system of beliefs over their welfare. You were prepared to live with any consequences which flowed from your adherence to those beliefs, including the disability or death of the children. Postmortem examinations revealed ‘…His bones were thickened and porous and largely made up of poor-quality bone. He had insufficiency fractures to his shins, ribs, and radius. These would have been painful when they were caused and 1 would have caused further pain each time the broken ends of the bone rubbed against one another before they reunited. These fractures were all caused at least three weeks before death. There was overwhelming evidence that he had rickets … anaemia and [vitamin] deficiency. He had obviously been malnourished in life. … In life he had truly appalling dental health. His gums would have bled frequently. He would have experienced pain on eating anything hot, cold, or sweet. There would have been acute pain on biting and some constant dental pain. His sleep would almost certainly have been interrupted. He was severely stunted in his growth. At almost 4 years of age, he was buried in the clothes of an 18-month-old and was no taller in all probability than the average 14-month old child. … You decided not to help him because, to you, at that time, remaining true to your beliefs was more important than his welfare. …’. ‘…Once they found Child A's body…, [the father], performed CPR on him but to no avail. They then waited with the body for eight days in the hope that he would come back to them, and then buried him in the backyard. He said they had a belief in reincarnation and that they thought that Child A would come back because his work on earth was not yet done. They did not report his death to the authorities because such things as death were only to be shared within their community.

“The focus of this review is to capture learning about how Child A became lost from professional view and oversight. In doing so, the review will examine agency contact with Child A and family members across different local authority areas in what were initially considered to be unconnected episodes. It is only now that hindsight has enabled connections to be made between all these episodes and to build a bigger picture, highlighting the importance for all professionals to be robust in their assessment activity, triangulate information to eliminate doubt or confusion, ask searching questions, share information and be tenacious in their efforts to understand the impact of culture and beliefs on children’s safety and welfare. The review and the criminal proceedings highlighted that professionals ceased to have any contact with Child A due to the parents opting out of contact with agencies and seeing agency involvement as intrusive. The observations of Child A between his birth in 2016 and up to August 2018 carried out by the midwife, health visitor, Waltham Forest social worker, police and Children’s Centre workers had not given rise to any cause for concern about his development. It is now clear that there was a catastrophic deterioration in his health and welfare between that point and his death in early 2020 due to the appalling neglect by his parents. The last months of Child A’s life must have been unimaginably sad and painful given his health and medical needs.”

Source: Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) published on this website Friday 6 June 2025 by Jill Powell

Victims of rape and serious sexual assaults who face their cases being dropped by prosecutors will, for the first time, be given the right to have their case reviewed by a different prosecutor before any final decisions are made.

Criminal cases can be stopped at any point if a prosecutor decides there is no longer a realistic prospect of conviction. Under the pilot which launches this week in the West Midlands, survivors of rape or serious sexual abuse will be offered the right to request a review by a different prosecutor before their case is dropped.  If that prosecutor determines there is enough evidence, the case will continue. 

Siobhan Blake, CPS lead for rape and Chief Crown Prosecutor of CPS West Midlands said:

"We know for rape victims, the prospect of their case being stopped can be absolutely devastating. Although they can request a review of our decision making now, if we have already stopped the case in court, there is nothing that can be done to reactivate the case if that review comes to a different conclusion. In those circumstance we offer an apology but appreciate that for a victim an apology rarely goes far enough or feels like a just outcome.

"This pilot offers greater reassurance for victims. It means that they will be alerted to the prospect of their case being stopped earlier, so that they can ask for a review by a different prosecutor. If the original decision is reversed then the case will continue, but even if it can’t, we hope that victims will have more confidence in the process and the earlier scrutiny of our decision making.

"Rape cases are incredibly complex and sensitive. We have specially trained prosecutors who do an excellent job building strong cases. This pilot offers an earlier check and balance which provides extra reassurance for victims."

Jade Blue McCrossen-Nethercott, campaigned for a change after the CPS dropped her case by offering no evidence in court. A subsequent VRR said the prosecution should have gone ahead but could not be reinstated.

She said:

“I’m hugely excited about what this pilot could mean for victims, and I hope it proves successful enough to be rolled out across the country. This pilot is a crucial safeguard – one that could have completely changed the outcome in my case, and so many others like it. I was profoundly failed and let down by how my case was handled, but I’ve since seen people within the CPS who are genuinely working to make it better."

Solicitor General Lucy Rigby KC MP said:

“This Government is treating violence against women and girls with the seriousness it deserves, committing to halving this horrific crime as part of our Plan for Change.

“Part of that is about empowering victims and improving their experience of the criminal justice system. That’s exactly why I have worked with the CPS on a new pilot scheme for victims of rape and serious sexual assault, which will allow victims an enhanced right of review in cases where the CPS intends to offer no evidence, importantly prior to a case being stopped. 

“Campaigners and experts tell me that this is what they want, and I want to thank them for their advocacy on this vital issue. 

“There is much more to do. But this is a further step towards the criminal justice system that victims deserve, and one which will ultimately make Britain’s streets safer."

Source: Charity Commission published on this website Wednesday 4 June 2025 by Jill Powell

The Commission has also issued an Order disqualifying one of the charity’s trustees from being a trustee and from holding a position with senior management functions, for a period of eight years.

Palestinian Refugee Project was registered in 2021, with objects to benefit the Palestinian diaspora in refugee camps through poverty relief, advancing education, relieving sickness and providing social welfare and leisure facilities.

The Charity Commission, the regulator of charities in England and Wales, began examining the charity in December 2023, after concerns were raised about its social media activity. The regulator also identified that all of the charity’s then trustees appeared to be related, with one serving as CEO, giving rise to concerns about potential conflicts of interest.

The trustees’ responses to the Commission’s questions raised further concerns, for example, that they lacked an understanding of their legal duties and responsibilities, including the importance of trustees acting and making decisions collectively.

The regulator established that, as a result of governance failings, Mrs Taghrid Al-Mawed-Layton – who was also acting as the charity’s voluntary CEO – had sole responsibility for the charity’s social media activity and used the charity’s platforms to promote political material, which was not in furtherance of the charity’s aims, and / or was divisive and inflammatory.

This included posts that could be interpreted as downplaying acts of terrorism, and which tried to raise support for a change to Israel’s recognition as a state. The charity failed to implement a formal social media policy and the remaining trustees lacked oversight in relation to its social media activity.

The Commission has disqualified Mrs Al-Mawed-Layton for eight years due to her role in mismanagement and / or misconduct of the charity, including social media activity on behalf of the charity. The Order disqualifies Mrs Al-Mawed-Layton from being a trustee and holding a senior management position in any charity.

Joshua Farbridge, Head of Compliance Visits and Inspections at the Charity Commission said:

“We found a number of serious failings at Palestinian Refugee Project, which put the charity’s finances and reputation at risk. The charity, in effect, was being run by a single trustee who either did not understand, or failed to adhere to, basic trustee duties.

“It’s important to stress that the Commission does not seek to encroach on any individual’s right to freedom of speech, expression, or beliefs. And we recognise that events in the Middle East over recent months and years have been deeply emotive and distressing.

“However, trustees have clear legal obligations, including to act in line with the charity’s purpose and best interests, and act reasonably and prudently. Sadly, the good aims this charity set out to achieve was seriously undermined by the conduct and failings of its trustees.”

As part of its case, the regulator also established that a failure to implement financial controls meant that funds were spent without proper authorisation or controls. The charity is overdue in filing its accounts for the years ending April 2023 and 2024.

The Charity Commission’s case involving the charity will remain ongoing allowing the regulator to follow up on the remedial actions set out in the Official Warning.