sadly not
he could only sue her for what he could prove he had lost, which was limited to the missing hours when her husband had been working on their houses but charging the company as if he'd been working on theirs (for example, 3 days to repair a chimney. on a house that didn't HAVE a chimney), and the fraudulent cheques. which totalled around £750k.

he couldn't trace the money into the properties, the law doesn't work like that. but realistically, (i) she couldn't have bought them without his stolen cash and (ii) she was a director and so had an obligation to act in the best interests of the company, which would have been to get the company to buy these amazing deals, NOT her greedy self! so if you add up what it's cost the company, it totals millions and millions, but you can't sue for that because the loss is too remote to prove. infuriating.
( rachelswipe with a fork, Tue 29 Jan 2008, 12:24, Reply)