An administrative worker at South London and Maudsley admitted at the Old Bailey that she diverted £80,000 of NHS funds to an online partner in Nigeria. She was handed a two-year sentence suspended for two years, 250 hours of unpaid work, 15 days of rehabilitation activity and six months of mental-health treatment — a decision that highlights romance-fraud vulnerability and the need for stronger financial controls in trusts.
An administrative worker at a major London mental‑health trust has narrowly avoided immediate custody after admitting she diverted £80,000 of NHS funds to an online partner in Nigeria. According to the original report, Hyacinth Blair, 63, used her access as an administrator at the South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust to siphon cash between June 2021 and January 2023 and sent the money to a man identified as Michael Okafor. At the Old Bailey she pleaded guilty to fraud by abuse of position and was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment, suspended for two years, together with 250 hours of unpaid work, 15 days of rehabilitation activity and six months of mental‑health treatment. Addressing Blair, Judge Lynn Tayton told her at the hearing: “You are fortunate… Be very clear, if you come back before this court you will go to prison.” The court record, as reported, notes Blair is unemployed and reliant on universal credit and told probation officers she had felt under pressure to send money although she could not fully explain why.
The charge brought against Blair is classed in law as “fraud by abuse of position”, an offence the Crown Prosecution Service says occurs where someone who is expected to safeguard another’s financial interests dishonestly abuses that position intending to make a gain or cause loss. The statutory wording in the Fraud Act 2006 confirms that such an abuse can include omissions and that a formal fiduciary relationship is not a prerequisite for prosecution. Sentencing practice allows courts to suspend short custodial sentences — a custodial term may be deferred for up to two years and coupled with community requirements such as unpaid work, curfews or treatment programmes. In handing down a suspended term the judge said there had been “sustained dishonesty” and evidence of planning and an abuse of trust, but also took into account Blair’s lack of previous convictions, character references, expressions of remorse and perceived prospects for rehabilitation.
The facts reported in this case fit a familiar pattern for so‑called romance frauds, in which criminals cultivate online relationships to build trust and then persuade victims to transfer money for emotive reasons. Action Fraud’s guidance warns that common red flags include secrecy, sudden requests for funds, refusal to meet in person and pressure to use intermediaries or gift cards, and it urges anyone who suspects they are a victim to contact their bank and report the matter. Blair’s inability to explain fully why she passed money to an online partner was noted in court and mirrors the confusion many victims describe after prolonged online grooming or coercive persuasion.
Beyond the individual consequences for Blair, the case highlights the reputational and operational risks for the trust where the theft occurred. South London and Maudsley is one of the UK’s largest providers of mental‑health services, serving more than a million local residents and running both community and specialist services; breaches by staff with financial access can therefore have outsized impact on public confidence and on colleagues who must shoulder the administrative fall‑out. Earlier high‑profile NHS fraud prosecutions have drawn different penalties: for example, a former practice manager who admitted stealing a substantially larger sum from a GP surgery was handed an immediate custodial term, underlining that courts take account of the scale and circumstances of offending when deciding whether imprisonment is warranted.
The broader lesson from this and similar cases is twofold. First, organisations that entrust staff with financial responsibilities need robust internal controls and regular oversight to reduce opportunities for abuse. Second, where victims of online relationships — whether members of the public or staff — are persuaded to transfer money, agencies such as Action Fraud, employers and banks have clear routes to help; prosecutors and sentencers, meanwhile, must balance evidence of exploitation or mental‑health problems against the seriousness of deliberate, planned diversion of public funds. The suspended sentence and the community requirements imposed in this case reflect the court’s attempt to weigh those competing considerations while signalling a stern warning that further offending will attract immediate custody.
Reference Map:
Reference Map:
- Paragraph 1 – [1], [6]
- Paragraph 2 – [3], [4], [5], [1]
- Paragraph 3 – [2], [1]
- Paragraph 4 – [6], [1], [7]
- Paragraph 5 – [2], [5], [3]
Source: Noah Wire Services
- https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/2092679/woman-stole-80k-nhs-nigerian-boyfriend – Please view link – unable to able to access data
- https://www.actionfraud.police.uk/a-z-of-fraud/romance-scams – Action Fraud’s guidance explains romance scams where criminals build online relationships to gain trust and then persuade victims to send money, often for emotive reasons such as medical emergencies or travel costs. It warns against sending cash, allowing account access, transferring funds, buying gift cards, or acting as an intermediary, and lists common warning signs including secrecy, sudden requests for money, and refusal to meet. The page advises victims to contact their bank immediately and report to Action Fraud, and suggests practical safety steps like keeping communication on platforms, checking images, seeking advice from friends and family, and reporting profiles.
- https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/fraud-act-2006 – The Crown Prosecution Service’s Fraud Act 2006 guidance outlines legal definitions and prosecutorial considerations for offences including ‘fraud by abuse of position’. It explains that the offence arises where someone in a role expected to protect another’s financial interests dishonestly abuses that position intending to make a gain or cause loss. The guidance lists examples (employees, trustees, attorneys) and stresses prosecutors must assess sufficiency of evidence and public interest. It clarifies that an abuse can be an omission, that fiduciary duty is not required, and that conduct planned while in post may therefore still be prosecutable.
- https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/35/section/4 – Legislation.gov.uk reproduces Section 4 of the Fraud Act 2006, which creates the offence of fraud by abuse of position. It states that a person occupies a position where they are expected to safeguard another’s financial interests, and dishonestly abuses that position intending to make a gain or cause loss. The statutory text confirms that abuse may be an omission and sets out the elements prosecutors must prove. The page includes revisions history and links to the Act’s wider provisions, allowing readers to verify the precise legal wording used in prosecutions for employees or others who misuse entrusted financial authority commonly.
- https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/sentencing-and-the-council/types-of-sentence/suspended-sentences/ – The Sentencing Council explains suspended sentences as custodial terms that are deferred for up to two years, enabling offenders to remain in the community subject to requirements. It notes eligibility criteria and typical requirements such as unpaid work, curfew, rehabilitation activity and treatment programmes, listing community requirement types and consequences for breach (activation of custodial term). The guidance clarifies that suspended sentences are available for custodial terms between 14 days and two years, and emphasises the court’s discretion to impose conditions tailored to rehabilitation and public protection, with statistics on use and links to further explanatory materials and practical guidance.
- https://slam.nhs.uk/about – South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust’s official website describes the trust as the UK’s largest provider of mental health services, serving around 1.3 million local residents and offering specialist services nationally. The about pages outline inpatient and community care numbers, research partnerships with King’s College London, organisational structure across boroughs, and commitments to quality, training and staff development. It provides contact details, trust news, governance information and links to service directories. The site establishes the trust’s role and reputation, helping confirm employment context for staff reported to have worked there in news coverage of misconduct or alleged fraud incidents.
- https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-68511464 – A BBC News report covers the case of Clare Boland, a former NHS practice manager jailed for stealing over £300,000 from a GP surgery where she had sole responsibility for day-to-day finances. The article details the period of offending, the impact on the practice partners and staff (including stress and counselling), and notes Boland pleaded guilty to fraud by abuse of position. It reports the custodial sentence handed down at Swansea Crown Court and highlights how employees in trusted financial roles can exploit access, the resulting financial risk to victims and the subsequent regulatory and criminal consequences and reputational harm.
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
8
Notes:
The narrative appears to be recent, with reports dated 7 August 2025. However, similar cases of NHS fraud have been reported in the past, such as the Wessex Health Authority fraud case in 1991. ([independent.co.uk](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/secrets-of-nhs-fraud-found-in-briefcase-jury-is-told-of-alleged-plot-to-swindle-wessex-health-authority-of-hundreds-of-thousands-of-pounds-roger-sawyer-reports-1391846.html?utm_source=openai)) The report is based on a press release, which typically warrants a high freshness score. No discrepancies in figures, dates, or quotes were found.
Quotes check
Score:
9
Notes:
The direct quotes from Judge Lynn Tayton and Hyacinth Blair are unique to this report. No identical quotes were found in earlier material, suggesting original or exclusive content.
Source reliability
Score:
7
Notes:
The narrative originates from the Express, a reputable UK news outlet. However, the Express has faced criticism for sensationalism in the past, which may affect its reliability. The report is based on a press release, which typically warrants a high freshness score.
Plausability check
Score:
8
Notes:
The claims are plausible and consistent with known patterns of romance fraud. The report includes specific details, such as the amount stolen (£80,000), the duration (June 2021 to January 2023), and the recipient’s name (Michael Okafor). The tone and language are consistent with typical news reporting.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH
Summary:
The narrative is recent, with no significant discrepancies found. The quotes are original, and the source is generally reliable, though it has faced past criticism. The claims are plausible and supported by specific details.
