Fraud & dishonesty

Dishonesty charges carry consequences that follow a conviction far beyond any sentence.

Fraser Lawyers acts in defence of fraud, stealing, and related dishonesty charges in the Magistrates and District Courts of Queensland.

Call (07) 5554 6116 Send a short enquiry

A conviction for a dishonesty offence does not expire. It appears on criminal history checks, affects professional registrations, and is often the first question asked on a visa application, a working with children check, or an employment form. The sentence served is frequently shorter than the consequences that follow it.

Queensland dishonesty offences are set out in the Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld). The most commonly charged provision is s 408C, the general fraud offence, which covers a wide range of conduct involving dishonest dealing, false documents, and misuse of property. Stealing under s 391 and receiving under s 433 are charged alongside or instead of fraud depending on how the prosecution characterises the conduct.

Sentencing courts treat dishonesty offences with particular emphasis on general deterrence. The message to the public is that this type of offending will be punished. That emphasis can work against a person with an otherwise good history, because the court is looking beyond the individual to the deterrent effect on others.

The question of whether a conviction is recorded matters acutely for dishonesty offences. A recorded conviction can end a career, cancel a professional registration, and close borders. Whether that question is properly put to the court depends on the quality of the material placed before it.

Scope of work

What we help with

Fraser Lawyers acts in defence of fraud and dishonesty matters, including:

Matter: What it usually involves
Fraud: Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld) s 408C; the general dishonesty offence; maximum 5 years (basic), up to 20 years where aggravated by value, position of trust, or carrying on a business of fraud
Stealing: Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld) s 391; appropriation of property with intent to permanently deprive; maximum 5 years (higher where aggravated)
Receiving stolen property: Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld) s 433; possessing property knowing it was dishonestly obtained
Forgery and uttering: Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld) s 488; making or using false documents
Identity fraud: Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld) s 408D; use of another person's identity information to obtain a financial advantage or cause disadvantage
Robbery: Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld) s 411; stealing accompanied by violence or threats; District Court jurisdiction
Extortion: Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld) s 415; obtaining property by threats or menaces
Corporate fraud and director misconduct: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ss 184, 1041G; dishonest use of position or information; ASIC-investigated matters
Obtaining financial advantage by deception: Misrepresentation in relation to loans, insurance, or benefit claims
Employment and embezzlement matters: Alleged misappropriation in an employment or agency context

Fraud under s 408C is a broad provision. It captures conduct far beyond the obvious: submitting false invoices, misrepresenting qualifications to obtain employment, giving false information to receive a government benefit, and using another person’s payment credentials. The breadth of the provision is one reason it is the workhorse of Queensland’s dishonesty law.

Corporate fraud matters, where they involve conduct regulated under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), sit across two jurisdictions. ASIC investigates. The Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions may charge. State and federal provisions can overlap, and the choice of charge is not always straightforward.

Process

What happens after you are charged.

The fraud offence under s 408C of the Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld) requires the prosecution to prove that the accused, by a dishonest act or by a dishonest omission, obtained a financial advantage or caused financial disadvantage to another. Dishonesty is not defined by the statute; it takes its ordinary meaning and is assessed objectively.

For stealing under s 391, the prosecution must prove appropriation of property belonging to another, with intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property. The intent element is crucial. A person who genuinely believed they had a right to the property, even if that belief was wrong, may not have the requisite intent.

The commonly contested elements across dishonesty charges include:

Dishonesty: Was the accused’s conduct, by the standards of ordinary people, dishonest? Did the accused know it was dishonest by those standards?
Intent: Did the accused intend to permanently deprive or intend to obtain a financial advantage? Evidence of intention is often circumstantial, and circumstantial evidence is not always as strong as it looks.
Knowledge: For receiving under s 433, the accused must have known, or ought reasonably to have known, that the property was dishonestly obtained. A claim that the accused did not know can be tested but is not automatically defeated by the prosecution simply showing that the accused had possession.
Causation: Did the conduct of the accused actually cause the financial advantage or disadvantage alleged? In complex fraud matters, tracing financial flows and establishing causation requires careful examination of accounts and records.

For corporate fraud under ss 184 and 1041G of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), the prosecution must prove that the accused was a director or officer who used their position or information dishonestly, with intent to gain an advantage for themselves or another, or to cause detriment to the corporation. The element of dishonest purpose is essential and is not satisfied merely by showing that a director made a bad or self-interested decision.

Sentencing

General deterrence and the problem of good character.

Sentencing courts in Queensland apply the purposes in s 9 of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld). For dishonesty offences, general deterrence receives significant weight. The court is explicitly considering the message sent to others, not just the appropriate response to this accused.

This creates a practical difficulty for defendants with otherwise good backgrounds. A person with no criminal history, steady employment, and strong community ties might expect that background to carry their matter. In a drug or violence matter, it often does. In a dishonesty matter, the courts have consistently held that general deterrence can operate to limit the extent to which subjective features reduce a sentence.

This does not mean good character is irrelevant. It means the submission needs to be more carefully constructed. The court requires material that goes beyond a list of good qualities; it needs a coherent account of how the offending occurred, why it will not occur again, and why the deterrent purpose can be partially achieved by means other than a sentence that will make general headlines.

The recording of conviction question is separately important. A court may deal with a matter without recording a conviction under s 12 of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld). For a dishonesty offence, the impact of a recorded conviction on employment, professional registration, and travel is a legitimate factor in that assessment. It requires specific evidence: what registration is at risk, what employment will be lost, what border consequences will follow.

Evidence

How fraud investigations build their case.

Fraud matters are document-heavy. Police investigations obtain bank records, email accounts, phone records, tax documents, and business records, often through compulsory production powers or by warrant. By the time a charge is laid, the prosecution may have assembled a substantial body of documentary evidence that was gathered before the accused was even interviewed.

The early stage of a fraud investigation often involves a record of interview. The accused may have been invited in to “explain” the transactions. What is said in that context is admissible evidence. The characterisation of an interview as informal or voluntary does not change the rules about admissibility.

Disclosure in fraud matters can be extensive. A large volume of documents is not necessarily a strong case. The prosecution still has to prove each element of the offence beyond reasonable doubt in relation to each alleged transaction. Reviewing the disclosure with that structure in mind, rather than treating the volume of documents as itself determinative, is the appropriate approach.

For matters involving ASIC or the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, the investigation powers are broader and the resources applied to the prosecution are greater. Those matters require engagement early and proper attention to the specific Commonwealth provisions that apply.

Time matters

Deadlines and risks.

Fraud charges in Queensland can move slowly through the system because of the volume of documentary evidence, but that does not mean there is no urgency in obtaining advice early.

Where police have obtained documents from a bank, employer, or platform provider, they may approach the accused for an explanation before formal charges are laid. That conversation is not informal. What is said can form the basis of an admission, and the absence of legal advice at that point is often regretted.

Where a charge has been laid, the prosecution is required to disclose its evidence. In a complex fraud matter, that disclosure may take time, but it should be pursued actively. The time between charge and the plea decision is the period in which the evidence needs to be understood, the elements tested, and the sentencing implications assessed.

For matters with professional registration consequences, the regulatory body may move to suspend or cancel the registration before the criminal proceedings are finalised. That process is separate from the criminal charge and requires separate attention. Acting on both fronts at once is sometimes necessary.

A guilty plea entered at an early stage attracts a discount under s 13A of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld). The longer the delay, the smaller the available discount. If a guilty plea is ultimately the right decision, the timing of that decision matters.

What we do

How Fraser Lawyers acts in these matters.

Fraser Lawyers acts in defence of fraud and dishonesty charges in the Magistrates and District Courts of Queensland. Blake Fraser reviews the charge, the disclosure, and the elements the prosecution must prove, and advises on whether a defence is available and what the sentencing range would be if a guilty plea were entered.

For matters with professional registration or visa consequences, those parallel issues are identified early so that advice on them can be obtained alongside the criminal defence strategy.

Where the matter proceeds to sentence, a sentencing submission is prepared addressing the s 9 sentencing purposes, the role of general deterrence in this category of offence, the subjective circumstances of the accused, and the non-conviction question under s 12 of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld) where it is properly available.

We do not make extravagant promises about outcomes. No competent lawyer should.

Practical

Documents to bring.

Notice to appear or police complaint The charging document given at the time of charge or by mail
Record of interview or caution statement Any written or recorded statement made to police or investigators
QP9 (police summary of facts) If received; summarises the prosecution case
Bank statements or financial records Covering the period of alleged offending; for cross-referencing with prosecution evidence
Employment records Particularly where the offending is alleged to have occurred in an employment context
Emails, messages, or correspondence Relevant to the context of any alleged transaction or dealing
Any documents obtained by police or investigators Including copies of production notices or search warrant inventories
Professional registration certificates If you hold a professional licence that may be affected by the charge
Previous criminal history If known; the court will have its own record
Character references From people who can speak to your conduct, work history, and community contributions

Pathway

The likely path.

Step 1 — Charge review and early advice.

The first step is reviewing the charge, identifying the applicable statutory provision, and understanding what the prosecution must prove. For fraud matters, this includes identifying the alleged transactions, the period of offending, and the amount involved. The sentencing range, the available defences, and the non-conviction question are assessed at this stage.

Step 2 — Disclosure and evidence review.

The prosecution discloses the evidence on which it relies. In fraud matters, that can include bank records, business documents, electronic records, and expert accounting analysis. Fraser Lawyers reviews the disclosure to assess whether each element of the offence is properly made out, and whether any defence can be identified.

Step 3 — Plea decision.

With the disclosure reviewed, the appropriate plea is assessed. For some matters, the prosecution case is strong and a guilty plea at an early stage is the better outcome, attracting a sentencing discount under s 13A of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld). For others, an element of the offence is not made out, the evidence is circumstantial, or an issue of intent or knowledge requires testing. That assessment is made honestly.

Step 4 — Sentencing preparation.

Where the matter proceeds to sentence, a submission is prepared addressing the sentencing purposes, the extent to which general deterrence is appropriate in this matter, the subjective circumstances of the accused, and the question of whether a conviction should be recorded. Evidence going to the non-conviction question is specific: the court requires material about what registration, employment, or visa consequence a recorded conviction will produce.

Step 5 — Court appearance.

Fraser Lawyers appears in the Magistrates Court for lower-value matters and manages the District Court process, including briefing counsel for trial where required, for more serious fraud or robbery matters. For Commonwealth fraud matters, the procedure in the federal jurisdiction applies and is managed accordingly.

Frequently asked

Questions we hear often.

Plain-English answers to the questions clients tend to ask. If your question is not here, call us.

Get in touch

What is the difference between fraud and stealing in Queensland?

Both are dishonesty offences under the Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld), but they have different elements. Stealing under s 391 requires appropriation of property with intent to permanently deprive the owner. Fraud under s 408C is broader: it captures obtaining a financial advantage or causing financial disadvantage by dishonest acts or omissions, including false representations. A prosecution may charge fraud where the conduct involved misrepresentation rather than physical taking. The choice of charge affects the maximum penalty (stealing: 5 years unaggravated; fraud under s 408C: 5 years basic, rising to 14 or 20 years in aggravated circumstances) and the elements that must be proved.

Will a fraud conviction affect my job or professional registration?

Almost certainly. Most professional licensing regimes in Queensland (legal, medical, nursing, teaching, financial services, security) require the holder to be a fit and proper person and to report criminal convictions. A conviction for a dishonesty offence is treated seriously by licensing bodies. The impact depends on the specific registration and the nature of the offence. Whether a conviction should be recorded under s 12 of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld) is a question that should be raised at sentencing, supported by specific evidence about the registration consequences.

Can I be charged with fraud and a Corporations Act offence at the same time?

Yes. Where alleged conduct involves a director or officer, the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ss 184 and 1041G apply in addition to Queensland criminal law. The Commonwealth provisions are prosecuted by the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, often following an ASIC investigation. State and Commonwealth charges can arise from the same conduct, and the procedures in the federal jurisdiction differ from those in Queensland courts. Both sets of potential liability need to be understood from the outset.

I spoke to police before I was charged. Can that be used against me?

Statements made to police in the context of an investigation are admissible if they were made voluntarily and in compliance with the requirements of the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld). An informal conversation at the station does not remove the requirement to caution the person and advise them of their right to legal representation. Where an admission was made without a caution, or during a period of custody that exceeded the lawful limit, admissibility can be challenged at a voir dire hearing before trial.

Will I go to prison for a fraud conviction?

The sentencing range depends on the amount involved, the nature of the conduct, the period of offending, and the subjective circumstances of the accused. For a single low-value fraud by a person with no criminal history, a non-custodial outcome is available in appropriate cases. For large-scale or systematic fraud, or fraud involving a breach of trust (an employee stealing from an employer, for instance), courts apply general deterrence strongly and custodial sentences are common. The answer depends on the specific facts and is better addressed after reviewing the charge.

What is identity fraud?

Identity fraud under s 408D of the Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld) involves using another person’s identity information to obtain a financial advantage for yourself or another person, or to cause disadvantage to the person whose identity is used or to a third person. Identity information is broadly defined and includes name, address, date of birth, financial account details, and identifying numbers. The maximum penalty is 5 years. Identity fraud is increasingly charged alongside general fraud under s 408C where the conduct involves impersonation or use of another’s credentials.

Is robbery treated as a dishonesty offence or a violence offence?

Robbery under s 411 of the Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld) is a combined offence: it involves stealing (a dishonesty element) accompanied by violence or threats of violence (a violence element). It is indictable, heard in the District Court, and carries a maximum of 14 years. Because robbery involves both elements, it is treated seriously at sentencing from both the dishonesty and the violence perspectives. The specific circumstances, including whether a weapon was involved and the extent of any violence, will significantly affect the sentencing range.

Talk to Fraser Lawyers about your fraud or dishonesty charge.

A short enquiry is usually enough to understand what the charge involves, what the options are, and what the consequences of a recorded conviction would be. Fraser Lawyers is based at 86 Bundall Road, Bundall, and acts for clients across the Gold Coast and South East Queensland.