Director prosecuted for breaching Private Security Industry Act

The case was brought forward by the SIA after the regulator investigated the use of a cloned licence by a security operative at various locations across the South East of England.

The security operative using a cloned licence was allegedly supplied by Ahsin Akhtar’s security company. A letter of request for information was sent to Akhtar on 12 December 2022. Akhtar failed to respond to repeated requests for information and was subsequently invited for an interview under caution by SIA investigators.

He attended two interviews under caution on 16 May 2023 and 14 June 2023. During the interviews, Akhtar acknowledged his failure to provide the information requested. However, he did not provide the required information to the SIA at the interviews, while the information he did share was found to be contradictory in nature.

He pleaded guilty to an offence outlined in Section 19 of the Private Security Industry Act 2001 pertaining to obstructing SIA officials or those with delegated authority or failing to respond to a request for information. Akhtar  was sentenced at the first hearing.

During the sentencing, the bench commented: “Mr Akhtar. It is a serious matter when you fail to provide information to resolve an investigation when requested to do so. You have been given extensions allowing you the opportunity to provide this information. However, you still never met the request to provide the requested information.”

Nicola Bolton, one of the SIA’s criminal investigations managers, said: “Ahsin Akhtar pleaded guilty to withholding information from the SIA. This is a serious matter as failing to provide information to the SIA can obstruct the course of a criminal investigation and put the safety of the public at risk.”

Bolton added: “Responding to a request for information initiated by the SIA is a legal requirement. Offenders like Akhtar need to be aware of the consequences of their illegal actions. Ahsin Akhtar now has a criminal record.”

Illegal working uncovered

On 14 November last year, a Flintshire man was convicted at Mold Magistrates’ Court for working illegally at a holiday park in North Wales.

Joel Williamson pleaded guilty at the first hearing and was sentenced to a total fine of £212, including a £100 contribution towards prosecution costs and a victim surcharge of £32. The fine itself was reduced from £100 to £80 due to Williamson’s early guilty plea.

The case began in October 2022, when Williamson approached a security provider to enquire about employment as a security operative. Williamson told his would-be employer that he had completed all of the relevant security training courses and that he held a valid SIA door supervision licence.

Williamson was asked by the employer to provide a copy of his SIA licence. He  informed the security company that his actual licence was still in the post.

Williamson started work at a North Wales holiday park in October 2022, carrying out the following duties in the capacity of a door supervisor: patrolling the park and attending any incidents of disorder.

His employer made multiple requests to Williamson for him to provide his physical SIA licence card as proof of being licensed. Williamson continued to respond with various reasons as to why he was unable to do so.

He was subsequently dismissed by his employer in March 2023 for failing to provide adequate proof of holding a valid SIA licence.

Criminal investigation

In March 2023, the SIA received information from North Wales Police that Joel Williamson had been working illegally for four-and-a-half months as a security operative at a holiday park. The SIA began a criminal investigation into Williamson’s activities and wrote to him on 5 June last year.

Williamson was interviewed in Mold, North Wales on 7 June by SIA criminal investigation officers and admitted to engaging in licensable conduct without a licence. It was established that Williamson did not have an active SIA licence and had never made an application for one.

Williamson claimed to have completed a security industry training course and believed that, by doing so, this would make him SIA licensed.

Mark Chapman, one of the SIA’s criminal investigations managers, stated: “Williamson worked while falsely claiming to be a licensed security operative. This created a potential safeguarding risk where he was employed without licence pre-eligibility checks having been carried out.”

Chapman concluded: “Williamson’s actions took away legitimate work from genuine SIA licence holders. As a result, he has incurred a fine and a criminal record. Those who fall foul of the licensing regime and choose to circumvent it bring the private security industry into disrepute and undermine the key purpose of public protection.”