Proceeds of Crime Lawyers Parramatta

Proceeds of crime are any assets, property, or financial benefits that the NSW Crime Commission alleges were derived from, or used in connection with, serious criminal activity. Under the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (CARA), this includes cash, bank account balances, real estate, vehicles, superannuation, jewellery, cryptocurrency, and any other property the Commission can link to an offence.

The definition is broader than most people expect. It doesn't just cover money sitting in an account after a drug transaction. It covers the house deposit that the Commission says was funded by unlawful income five years ago. It covers a car purchased with money they allege was mixed with criminal proceeds. It covers a business built, according to their analysis, on a foundation that started with illegitimate capital. The net reaches into assets accumulated over years, not just what was in your pocket when police knocked on the door.

What makes CARA distinctive is that it doesn't require a criminal conviction. The proceedings are civil, not criminal, and the standard of proof is the balance of probabilities, not beyond reasonable doubt. The Crime Commission applies to the Supreme Court for a restraining order over your property. If an assets forfeiture order follows under s22, ownership of everything covered by that order transfers to the government. If a proceeds assessment order is made under s28A, the court calculates the value of what it determines was derived from criminal activity, and you owe that amount.

The practical effect is that you can be acquitted of a criminal charge and still lose your property through CARA. The two proceedings run on separate tracks with separate standards. That disconnect is something many people don't learn about until the restraining order arrives.

We defend restraining orders and forfeiture applications across NSW. If the Crime Commission has moved against your assets, or you believe an application is coming, the first step is understanding exactly what's at stake and within what timeframe. Call 1800 527 529 or [book a consultation](/consultation).

Yes. Under the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (CARA), the NSW Crime Commission can apply to the Supreme Court for asset forfeiture without charging you with a criminal offence, let alone obtaining a conviction. The entire CARA framework operates as a civil proceeding, separate from any criminal case.

This is the part that blindsides people. You assume the government needs to prove you committed a crime before it can take your property. Under CARA, the Crime Commission applies for a restraining order, typically ex parte (meaning you aren't present and aren't notified in advance). By the time you find out, the order is already in force. Your bank accounts are frozen. Your property is restrained. Your vehicles may be immobilised. And you have 28 days under s25 to challenge the order before the Commission's position strengthens.

The forfeiture pathway works in stages. First, the restraining order freezes your assets in place. Then, the Crime Commission applies for either an assets forfeiture order under s22, which transfers restrained property to the Crown, or a proceeds assessment order under s28A, which quantifies the value the court determines you obtained through criminal activity and orders you to pay it. The burden sits on you to demonstrate that each restrained asset has a legitimate origin.

The disconnect between the criminal process and the CARA process is real. People are acquitted of criminal charges and then lose their homes through forfeiture proceedings that were running at the same time. The two processes have different courts, different evidentiary standards, and different outcomes. A not-guilty verdict in the District Court doesn't automatically undo a restraining order in the Supreme Court.

If the Crime Commission has applied for a restraining order or you've been notified that one is pending, the 28-day challenge window is your most important deadline.

Dealing with proceeds of crime as a criminal offence carries serious penalties under both Commonwealth and NSW law, and the consequences run alongside any asset forfeiture proceedings under CARA.

Under s193B of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), the penalty tiers are based on the mental element, not the dollar value. s193B(1) covers knowingly dealing with proceeds while also concealing them (maximum 20 years). s193B(2) covers knowingly dealing with proceeds (maximum 15 years). s193B(3) covers recklessly dealing with proceeds (maximum 10 years). "Dealing" is defined broadly: receiving, possessing, concealing, disposing of, or bringing property into NSW. Dollar value thresholds exist in s193C (negligence-based dealing), not s193B.

At the Commonwealth level, dealing in proceeds of crime under Division 400 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) carries up to 25 years imprisonment and fines of up to $495,000 (1,500 penalty units at the current Commonwealth rate of $330 per unit) for dealing with property worth $1 million or more. The Commonwealth offences cover dealings where the property was obtained through a Commonwealth, State, or Territory offence.

What catches people off guard is how these criminal charges interact with the CARA civil process. A criminal charge for dealing with proceeds of crime gives the Crime Commission a stronger basis for a restraining order application. You can face the criminal penalty (imprisonment, fines) and then lose the restrained property through forfeiture proceedings running on a separate track. Both processes target the same assets but through different mechanisms, with different standards of proof.

The other dimension is third-party liability. If you've received, stored, or moved money or property for someone else, and the prosecution alleges you knew or should have known its origin, the dealing charge applies to you personally. People who never committed the underlying offence can face significant penalties for their role in handling the proceeds.

If you're facing a proceeds of crime charge alongside a restraining order, the two matters need coordinated defence from the outset.

A restraining order under s10A of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (CARA) is a Supreme Court order that freezes your assets in place. It prevents you from selling, transferring, moving, or otherwise dealing with the property covered by the order. The NSW Crime Commission applies for it, and once it's in force, every account, property, and vehicle named in the order is locked.

The application process is what makes these orders so destabilising. The Crime Commission applies ex parte. That means the Supreme Court hears the application without you there, without your lawyer there, and usually without any notice to you at all. The first time most people learn about the order is when it's already been granted and served. At that point, the accounts are already frozen, the mortgage direct debit has already bounced, and you're already in a financial crisis before you've had any opportunity to respond.

For the restraining order to be granted, the Crime Commission must show reasonable suspicion that you have engaged in serious crime related activity within the past six years. "Serious crime related activity" is defined under the Act and covers a wide range of offences, not just drug trafficking. Once the order is made, the presumption shifts to you: you need to demonstrate, on the balance of probabilities, that each restrained asset was lawfully acquired.

The 28-day challenge window under s25 is the critical deadline. Within that period, you can apply to set aside or vary the order. After it closes, challenging the restraining order becomes significantly harder. That 28-day window is where most proceeds of crime defence work produces its best results.

Restraining orders can also capture third-party property, such as assets belonging to a spouse, parent, or business partner. If your assets have been caught in someone else's restraining order, an exclusion application under s25A is the mechanism to separate your property from the proceedings.

An unexplained wealth order under s28A of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 is a court order requiring you to pay the State an amount equal to the difference between your total assets and what your lawfully acquired income can account for. It doesn't require proof that specific property came from a specific crime. If the gap between what you own and what you can demonstrate you earned legally is significant, the court can order you to pay the difference.

Think of it as a financial audit with enforcement powers. The Crime Commission builds a profile of your assets: property, vehicles, bank balances, investments, superannuation, lifestyle spending, and overseas holdings. It then compares that profile against your declared income, your tax returns, and your documented financial history. Where the numbers don't reconcile, the burden shifts to you. You need to trace the legitimate source of every dollar, or the court treats the shortfall as proceeds of criminal activity.

The pressure this creates is compounding. An unexplained wealth order typically runs alongside a restraining order, so the accounts you'd need to access to pay legal fees, engage forensic accountants, or meet basic living expenses are already frozen. You're being asked to explain your financial history while cut off from the resources that would allow you to do so. That circular problem is one of the most common issues we deal with in proceeds of crime matters, and it's where an early application for release of funds becomes essential.

Defending an unexplained wealth order is a document-intensive process. We work with forensic accountants to trace income through employment records, tax assessments, business accounts, loan agreements, inheritance documentation, and property transaction histories. The Crime Commission's position weakens when every dollar has a documented trail. Where it doesn't, negotiated settlement becomes the conversation.

Twenty-eight days from the date of service. Under s25 of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990, you can apply to set aside or vary a restraining order within 28 days of being served. That deadline is statutory, and it shapes the entire trajectory of the matter.

The clock starts running the moment the order is served on you, not when the Crime Commission applied for it and not when the court granted it. In practice, you may lose several days at the front end because the application was made ex parte (without your knowledge), and service may happen days or even weeks after the order was granted. By the time you're served, the 28 days may already feel short.

Within that window, you need to obtain the Crime Commission's affidavit material, instruct a lawyer, review the evidence relied on, identify weaknesses in the application, and prepare your challenge. If the restraining order captures third-party property, those parties need to be identified and their exclusion applications prepared within the same timeframe. If you need access to frozen funds for legal expenses or mortgage payments, that application also needs to be filed.

After the 28-day window closes, the path narrows. You can still apply to vary or set aside the order, but the court's willingness to entertain the application diminishes, and the Crime Commission's position that the order should remain in force strengthens. The practical reality is that the first 28 days are when the order is most vulnerable to challenge. The evidence is freshest, the Crime Commission's case hasn't consolidated, and the court expects to hear your response.

Do not wait. If you've been served with a CARA restraining order, call 1800 527 529 immediately. The 28-day window doesn't pause for weekends, holidays, or the time it takes to find a lawyer.

Criminal charges and civil asset forfeiture under CARA are two separate legal proceedings that can run at the same time, against the same person, targeting the same assets, but with entirely different rules.

A criminal charge requires the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in either the Local Court, District Court, or Supreme Court. The accused is presumed innocent. The prosecution must prove each element of the offence. A guilty verdict can lead to imprisonment, fines, community corrections, or a conditional release order, depending on the charge and the circumstances.

Civil asset forfeiture under the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 runs through the Supreme Court. The NSW Crime Commission applies for a restraining order, then pursues either an assets forfeiture order or a proceeds assessment order. The standard of proof is balance of probabilities, which is lower than the criminal standard. The burden is effectively reversed: once the Commission establishes reasonable suspicion that you've been involved in serious crime related activity, the onus shifts to you to prove each asset was lawfully acquired.

The two tracks don't talk to each other the way people assume. An acquittal on a criminal charge doesn't automatically stop forfeiture proceedings. You can walk out of a criminal courtroom with no conviction recorded and still lose your home, your savings, and your superannuation through a CARA application that continues in the Supreme Court. The reverse is also true: losing property through forfeiture doesn't affect the outcome of your criminal trial.

Where both proceedings are running together, every decision in one affects the other. What you say in response to the criminal charge can be used in the forfeiture proceedings. The timing of a guilty plea in the criminal matter may strengthen the Commission's position in the Supreme Court. Defending both tracks requires coordinated strategy from day one. One lawyer handling both or, at minimum, two lawyers who communicate. Separate strategies that don't account for each other create gaps the Commission will use.

Yes, if the house falls within the scope of a restraining order and a subsequent assets forfeiture order is made under s22 of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990. When an assets forfeiture order is granted, ownership of the restrained property transfers to the Crown. That includes the family home.

This is the question behind most of the calls we receive about CARA matters. People contact us after being served with a restraining order, and the first thing they want to know is whether the home they live in, the property their family depends on, is genuinely at risk. The answer depends on what the Crime Commission can establish and what you can prove in response.

For the Commission to succeed, it needs to demonstrate reasonable suspicion that you've been engaged in serious crime related activity. If a forfeiture order follows, you bear the burden of proving, on the balance of probabilities, that the property was acquired with lawfully earned income. Where the house was purchased years ago, mortgage repayments were made from legitimate employment, and the funding trail is documented through bank records, tax returns, and loan agreements, the case for exclusion from forfeiture is strong.

Where it gets complicated is when a property was partially funded by income the Commission alleges was unlawful. A deposit made with funds the Commission links to criminal activity, even if the rest of the mortgage was serviced legitimately, gives the Commission a basis to argue the entire property is tainted. That argument isn't always successful, and the apportionment of lawful and unlawful contributions is something the court considers, but it means the defence needs detailed financial documentation going back to the date of purchase.

The frozen accounts problem compounds the risk. If your bank accounts are restrained, the mortgage direct debit fails. The lender starts enforcement proceedings independently. You can face a forfeiture application from the Crime Commission and mortgage default proceedings from the bank simultaneously, two separate threats to the same property. Applying for release of restrained funds to cover the mortgage is one of the first things we do when a family home is at stake.

Frozen assets remain restrained for the duration of the CARA proceedings. You cannot sell, transfer, withdraw from, or otherwise deal with any property covered by the restraining order until the order is set aside, varied, or the proceedings conclude.

In practical terms, a restraining order creates an immediate financial stranglehold. Bank accounts freeze. Mortgage direct debits bounce. Credit card payments stop. Superannuation is inaccessible. If you run a business, the business accounts may be restrained too, which means payroll, supplier payments, and operating costs become someone else's problem overnight. CARA proceedings can run for 12 months, 18 months, sometimes longer. That's 12 to 18 months of frozen finances while you're simultaneously expected to fund a legal defence.

The court does allow applications for the release of restrained funds in specific circumstances. Under the Act, you can apply for release to cover essential living expenses, mortgage or rent payments, and reasonable legal expenses. Those applications are not automatic. The court scrutinises the amounts claimed, requires evidence of genuine need, and often caps the release to the minimum necessary. The Crime Commission can oppose the application, and it frequently does.

The timing of these applications matters more than people realise. If you wait weeks before applying for fund release, the mortgage arrears accumulate, and the lender's enforcement action progresses independently of the CARA proceedings. Early application, filed within the first week of service if possible, prevents the kind of cascading financial damage that makes the entire matter harder to defend.

Where the restraining order covers property rather than cash, the property sits idle. You can't sell it, refinance against it, or use it as security for a loan. If it's an investment property, rental income may or may not be caught depending on the scope of the order. We review the exact terms of the restraining order to identify what's captured and what falls outside its reach, because not every order captures everything.

You can apply to the Supreme Court for release of restrained funds, but the release is not guaranteed and the process is contested.

Under the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990, the court has discretion to allow access to frozen funds for reasonable legal expenses and essential living costs. The practical reality is that the NSW Crime Commission opposes most release applications, either outright or by arguing the amounts are excessive. You won't simply ask the court to unfreeze an account. You'll need to provide detailed evidence of what you need, why you need it, and why no alternative source of funds exists.

For legal expenses, the application typically requires a costs estimate from your solicitor outlining the work involved and the fees anticipated. The court assesses whether the amounts are reasonable for the type of matter and the stage of proceedings. For living expenses, the application requires evidence of your income (or lack of it after the restraining order), your fixed obligations, mortgage or rent, utilities, insurance, dependants' needs, and your inability to meet those costs from unrestrained income.

The Catch-22 is real. You need a lawyer to prepare the application for release of funds, but you need released funds to pay the lawyer. In practice, some lawyers accept an initial retainer with the expectation that a fund-release application will be made early in the proceedings. We handle the fund-release application as a priority, usually within the first week of engagement, because the financial pressure of frozen accounts compounds every day it goes unaddressed.

The amounts released are usually capped. Courts are cautious about depleting the pool of assets that the Crime Commission is seeking to forfeit. You won't get full access restored. You'll get enough to meet immediate needs and fund the next stage of the defence. As the proceedings progress, further applications can be made for additional release.

The Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 defines "serious crime related activity" broadly, and the range of offences that trigger proceeds of crime investigations extends well beyond what most people expect.

Drug supply and trafficking are the most common. If police allege involvement in the manufacture, supply, or commercial distribution of prohibited drugs under the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985, the Crime Commission will almost certainly examine the suspect's financial profile for asset restraining purposes. Large-scale drug investigations routinely produce parallel CARA applications targeting property, vehicles, and bank accounts alongside the criminal charges.

Fraud and financial crime attract proceeds investigations by their nature. The alleged criminal conduct is financial, so the assets are already the focus. Tax evasion, investment fraud, identity crime, and money laundering under Commonwealth legislation all sit within the Crime Commission's scope.

Organised crime offences, including those prosecuted under the Criminal Organisations Control Act 2012, generate aggressive asset recovery activity. Participation in criminal groups, commercial-scale theft, and extortion offences are all within scope.

What surprises people is the breadth beyond those categories. Serious assault, robbery, firearms offences, sexual offences carrying significant penalties, and corruption offences can all generate proceeds investigations when the Crime Commission identifies an apparent wealth gap. A person charged with aggravated robbery or armed robbery under s97 or s98 of the Crimes Act 1900 may face a CARA application if the Commission identifies property it believes was acquired through crime related activity, even if that property has no direct connection to the robbery itself.

The threshold is "serious crime related activity" as defined in the Act, not a specific list of qualifying offences. If the activity attracts a penalty of 5 years or more imprisonment, it falls within scope. That captures a wide range of conduct that people don't associate with asset forfeiture until the restraining order arrives.

Proceeds of crime matters are among the most expensive areas of criminal law to defend, because the work spans two separate legal proceedings (the criminal charge and the CARA civil forfeiture process), involves forensic accounting, and can run for 12 months or longer.

We won't quote a flat fee for the full matter before we understand the scope. The cost depends on how many assets are restrained, whether criminal charges are running concurrently, whether third-party exclusion applications are needed, and whether the matter is resolved through negotiated settlement or a contested hearing in the Supreme Court. A straightforward challenge to a single restraining order involves different work than a complex matter with multiple restrained properties, unexplained wealth allegations, and parallel criminal proceedings in the District Court.

What we can do from the first consultation is give you a clear outline of the stages involved, the work required at each stage, and the likely cost range for each stage. We don't give open-ended retainers with no visibility on spend. You'll know what each stage costs before it begins.

The frozen accounts problem makes legal costs a more urgent question in CARA matters than in any other area of criminal defence. If your accounts are restrained, paying for a lawyer requires either unrestrained income, a family member's assistance, or a court order releasing funds from the restrained pool. We file fund-release applications as a priority, and we structure our engagement so that the initial retainer covers the work needed to get that application before the court.

Initial consultations are fixed-fee. The cost of defending the matter is structured in stages so you can see what's coming. Call 1800 527 529 or [book a consultation](/consultation) to discuss your specific situation. Open 7 days.