What is a deferred prosecution agreement and how does it affect ECCTA failure-to-prevent-fraud liability?
A DPA suspends prosecution on agreed conditions — typically including compliance reforms and evidence of reasonable procedures. ECCTA liability and DPA conditions overlap significantly on what counts as adequate fraud prevention evidence.
Not sure this applies to you? The offence targets large organisations that meet the size test — check whether you are in scope.
In short
- A DPA suspends prosecution on conditions — it is not an acquittal.
- DPA conditions for fraud offences typically require the same evidence as the ECCTA reasonable-procedures defence.
- Pre-existing, documented procedures are material to both prosecution decisions and DPA terms — the penalty quantum is determined on the facts of the case.
- DPA negotiation requires specialist criminal defence counsel — not compliance tools.
A deferred prosecution agreement is a negotiated outcome between a prosecutor (in the UK, the SFO or CPS) and an organisation facing criminal charges. The prosecution is suspended for a defined period on conditions that typically include: paying financial penalties, implementing compliance reforms, and providing ongoing cooperation.
For organisations facing ECCTA failure-to-prevent-fraud exposure, a DPA is a possible outcome if a relevant associated person commits fraud and the reasonable-procedures defence is not available. The SFO has used DPAs in predecessor offences (failure to prevent bribery under UKBA 2010). The same DPA legislative framework is available for ECCTA failure-to-prevent-fraud cases.
The conditions imposed under a DPA typically mirror what the reasonable-procedures defence requires: documented risk assessments, auditable training records, policy attestations, and evidence that senior leadership took the issue seriously. An organisation that can demonstrate pre-existing, documented procedures is better placed both to avoid prosecution and to negotiate DPA terms if prosecution is initiated.
DefenceFile does not provide legal advice on DPA strategy or negotiation. The above is a factual description of how DPAs work. Organisations facing active SFO engagement should retain specialist criminal defence counsel immediately.
The sample board pack — a one-page view of where evidence is complete and what is missing — opens in your browser, no email, no form.
Official sources
- CPS Deferred Prosecution Agreements Code of Practice
Published 2014-02-14; accessed 2026-06-15.
- SFO Deferred Prosecution Agreements collection
Last updated 2026-05-01; accessed 2026-06-15.
- Home Office failure-to-prevent-fraud guidance v1.5
Updated 2025-10-10; accessed 2026-06-15.
- Joint CPS-SFO Corporate Prosecutions guidance
Updated 2025-11-10; accessed 2026-06-15.
Keep reading
DefenceFile organises evidence for legal and compliance review. It does not provide legal advice, create privilege, certify scope, certify reasonable procedures, or guarantee that a statutory defence will succeed.