Fraud Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 4:"Page 2, line 3, after ““person”” insert ““at the time of””" The noble Lord said: Amendment No. 4 is grouped with Amendments Nos. 7 and 8. These are probing amendments to further tease out some of the details of Clause 2. I shall start with Amendment No. 8, which would require facts taken as a representation to be material. We feel that it is unclear exactly what is meant by the words ““by making the representation”” in Clause 2(3). For instance, in the course of negotiations between a buyer and a seller, each will make various representations to the other. Does every representation made in the course of such negotiations, considered individually, satisfy the requirement of Clause 2(3)? Or would that apply only to representations that are material? On the current drafting of the Bill, if, on a mortgage application, a person makes a false statement of fact, knowing it to be false, or knowing that it might be false, and with the intention of getting the application accepted, and gain for himself, he would be guilty of   the offence. This is so, however irrelevant the representation is, in fact, to the bank. Requiring that the fact be a material one in the eyes of the jury would ensure that such irrelevant representations are not caught by the clause. Amendments Nos. 4 and 7 address the issue of when the representation is taken to have been false. We feel that for clarity it should be made clear that the defendant’s state of mind is to be determined at the time of the representation. That is necessarily implied in the current law. I beg to move.