Rachel Wilson ‘felt she had no choice’ but to steal £200,000 from the law firm where she worked in order to fund her husband’s drug habit
17:24, 18 Jun 2025Updated 17:24, 18 Jun 2025
Rachel Wilson(Image: Merseyside Police)
A mum stole more than £200,000 from the solicitors firm where she worked, as she “felt she had no choice”. Rachel Wilson took the “terrible decision” to swindle the huge sum from her employer in order to fund her husband’s drug habit.
This four-year campaign of deceit was only discovered by her understudy when she went away on holiday. She wept and told family members “I’m sorry, I’m sorry” as she was locked up this afternoon.
Liverpool Crown Court heard today, Wednesday, that Wilson had worked as head cashier for Liverpool Legal Services Ltd, based on Whitechapel in Liverpool city centre, for 16 years. However, a colleague in the accounts department of the business, formerly known as Rex Makin and Co, noticed discrepancies in the company’s financial affairs while the 43-year-old defendant was off on annual leave in August last year.
Joanne Maxwell, prosecuting, described how these included 89 payments, totalling £13,529.25, into a bank account and savings account in her own name under the guise of payments to external consultants, dating as far back as April 2020. Wilson, of Bradshaws Lane in Southport, had meanwhile pocketed a further £196,000 during this same period by fabricating and cashing cheques for office expenditure, such as postage and furniture purchases.
The mother to an adult son and 14-year-old daughter went on to confess to her crimes during a disciplinary hearing in September 2024, then made similar admissions over her “fraudulent actions and gross misconduct” when interviewed by the police later the same month. She has no previous convictions.
Lloyd Morgan, defending, told the court: “This is a 43-year-old woman who has not been in trouble before and faces a very serious situation. It is one that she is extremely remorseful about. She is ashamed of her behaviour and acting so fraudulently for such a long time in a trusted position.
“I will not go into the behaviour to which she was subjected. She made nothing out of this fraud. There was no lavish lifestyle. There are no assets of any sort. She is working again now. It was done to fund her husband’s drug addiction, without going into any further detail.
“Perhaps, in other circumstances, if she was not appearing in the dock, she may be appearing as a complainant in a different sort of case. She is supported by her father and her son, who had to move out of the house.
“She has undertaken rehabilitation herself by entering cognitive behaviour therapy through talking therapies. She has been diagnosed with anxiety and depression and is receiving medication for that.
“There is then the background as to why this offending was committed. It is not the standard sort of defendant involved in fraudulent cases, or the standard reason for engaging in fraudulent behaviour. She felt that she had no choice and made a terrible decision and a bad decision. She felt that she did not have any other way out.
“She has a daughter living at the house. There will be a significant effect on her, were she to be deprived of her mother’s presence in that house.”
Wilson admitted one count of fraud by abuse of position. Appearing in the dock wearing a hooded black top over a floral dress and sporting a pair of glasses and long blonde hair, she wiped away tears with a tissue as she was jailed for two years and two months.
Sentencing, Recorder Mark Ainsworth said: “For the vast majority of your adult life, you have been working for the firm that became Liverpool Legal Services Ltd, a well known firm of solicitors operating here in Liverpool. You were operating as their head cashier.
“It was not the most sophisticated system, but it was effective. When you were confronted by the firm, you admitted what you had done. You have not tried to prevaricate or avoid blame since these matters came to light, and I bear that in mind.
“I have also read something of your personal circumstances. The family home was plainly an uncomfortable place to live. It is clear that you were taking this money not for high living or anything of that nature. You were faced with a difficult situation and sought to deal with it in this dishonest way.
“A distinction must be drawn with somebody taking this money to buy expensive designer clothes, go on holiday or buy expensive cars. You were using the money in different circumstances to try to alleviate the pressure on you, and I bear that in mind.
“Any business that loses £200,000, or thereabouts, is going to suffer. There is also the impact on others who are perfectly innocent. I have in mind both of your children but particularly your daughter, who is 14 years of age and who will be impacted by what may happen in this case.
“This is an unhappy situation, and the impact is not just on you. This case involved an abuse of trust over a substantial period of time. The impact on the firm has been significant.”
Wilson cried “I’m sorry, I’m sorry” as she looked to her dad and son in the public gallery while being led to the cells. The former responded by blowing her a kiss, while the latter told her: “Don’t be sorry. Love you mum.”