Regulator did not share documents with police who were investigating fraud allegations, RHI Inquiry is told

However, Ofgem took the decision not to inform the Department for the Economy (DfE) — formerly the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment (Deti) — which was running the scheme about that allegation, until it obtained “concrete evidence” to support the claim.

The inquiry heard that it would “not have been standard practice” for Ofgem to disclose details which “would allow identification” to Deti while an investigation was being carried out.

A second anonymous complaint about the same boiler was made in October 2016 and passed in a note to TUV Assembly Member Jim Allister. The PSNI, NI Audit Office, DfE and Ofgem were also notified at that time. Following a number of audits, Ofgem later accepted that Mr Brimstone’s installation had complied with the scheme’s rules.

However, the inquiry heard yesterday that the regulator did not provide all the documentation it held about Mr Brimstone’s application to the PSNI when it began investigating the fraud allegations.

In his written witness statement, Ofgem’s lawyer John Jackson told the inquiry he didn’t believe the documents that Ofgem wanted to share with the PSNI were “critical” to its investigation.

“There was nothing in the documents, or the conclusions that they reached, that would have assisted the police in a criminal prosecution of Stephen Brimstone,” he said.

He added that the documents “appeared to confirm that no offence of fraud had been committed” in Mr Brimstone’s RHI application.

No crime was detected by police during its investigation.

Inquiry chairman Sir Patrick Coghlin said either Mr Jackson’s assessment was that Ofgem’s audit could not assist police or he was not satisfied that Data Protection Act restrictions allowed him to release that information.

Mr Aiken said it was “difficult” to look at the Data Protection Act as intended to “create some sort of guessing game... for law