A senior NHS agency manager has been jailed for two and a half years for fraud after receiving a kickback of more than £50,000.
Julie Angrish, head of national recruitment at NHS Professionals Ltd (NHSP), pleaded guilty of fraud after defrauding the NHS out of a total of over £130,000 by using a company run by her sister and brother-in-law, Sharon and Michael Torpey, to falsify invoices for an employee.
Angrish, 55, then received a kickback payment of £51,480 from her sister and brother-in-law.
According to the Portsmouth Times, during sentencing at Winchester Crown Court, Judge Richard Parkes QC, told Angrish: “This is a very serious case of fraud made worse by the fact that public money is involved particularly public money which is in such short supply between 2008 and 2012 and especially so in the context of the NHS which we all know consumes a great deal of public money and which is being forced to make constant savings for efficiency.
“At the time it was so stretched you were stealing substantial sums of money from it.” He added: “You abused your position of power and responsibility.”
The prosecution told the court that Angrish was appointed as head of recruitment at NHSP in 2005 and worked there until 2012 when she was dismissed when the fraud was discovered.
The prosecution said: “She was appointed the national head of recruitment for NHSP which is the national body for supplying temporary professional staff to the NHS”
“She was responsible for delivery of recruitment services and strategic direction of NHSP, her responsibility included promotion of best practice policy and efficiency.”
They explained that Angrish, of Maidenhead, Berkshire, had interviewed and appointed a candidate who she consquently asked to send her invoices to her family’s management PR consultancy company, At Liberty, which then invoiced NHSP for this work plus 68 days of extra work that was not actually carried out.
The prosecution added: “Julie Angrish should not have used the services of At Liberty, there was a clear conflict of interest which she didn’t declare.
“At Liberty was not a vetted, approved employment agency or indeed an employment agency. At Liberty submitted inflated fee claims and claims for work that was not done and all this was authorised by the defendant herself.”