**Convicted Fraudster Faces Deportation After Long Legal Struggle**
After spending more than two decades battling legal proceedings, Alick Kapikanya, a convicted fraudster with a record stretching back over a quarter of a century, has been ordered to be deported from the United Kingdom. The 57-year-old, originally from Zambia, has faced repeated attempts by authorities to remove him since the early 1990s, yet until now had managed to remain in the country by way of multiple appeals.
Kapikanya’s first brush with the law came in 1992 when he was convicted of attempted fraud—a crime that soon made him eligible for deportation under existing immigration statutes. Despite the seriousness of his offences, and a failed appeal following a sentence for theft in 2000, Kapikanya remained in the country. The years that followed only saw his criminal activities escalate.
By 2010, another conviction for dishonesty again placed him in the crosshairs of immigration authorities. This led to a judge issuing yet another order for his deportation. Nevertheless, Kapikanya successfully appealed that decision, citing circumstances which, for a time, warranted his continued residence in Britain.
The most substantial blot on his record, however, came between 2014 and 2020. Kapikanya, described as the ringleader of a sophisticated mortgage fraud scheme, orchestrated a criminal enterprise that targeted vulnerable elderly homeowners in Manchester and across north-west England. Reports from Manchester Crown Court detailed how Kapikanya and his associates illegally assumed ownership of several residences before securing multiple mortgages against these properties—causing an estimated £3.5 million in losses.
Owners of these homes, many elderly, only became aware of the fraud when they faced the threat of losing their properties—a situation that forced them into protracted legal battles to reclaim their houses. During this time, Kapikanya reportedly lived a life of luxury, with evidence presented of his frequent use of chauffeur-driven vehicles, stays at exclusive hotels, and extravagant gambling sprees, including one night in which he wagered £170,000.
Having served a six-year sentence for the scam, Kapikanya hoped to avoid removal once again. The courts heard that his initial journey to the UK in 1983, as a teenager, was to be adopted, only for the adoption to fall through. He became, according to court evidence, assimilated within a religious sect and has since established familial and personal ties in Britain. His legal representatives argued that deportation would cause undue hardship, particularly to his 20-year-old son, and contended that Kapikanya, now in remission from stomach cancer and suffering from anxiety, is thoroughly “socially and culturally integrated” in the UK.
The latest appeal, presented before Lord Justice Bean, Lord Justice Peter Jackson, and Lord Justice Baker, once again saw Kapikanya’s legal team highlight his 42-year residence in the UK and a claimed lack of any substantial connection with Zambia. They sought to convince the court that these were “very compelling circumstances” that should outweigh the state’s interest in deporting him as a repeat offender.
In their conclusion, however, the Appeal Court firmly dismissed Kapikanya’s arguments. Their written judgment noted that five deportation orders had already been issued over a span of 25 years. The judges remarked that the system of appeals and reconsiderations had “served him well” by allowing him to remain in the country for so long. Still, they stated unequivocally that the time had come for the 2016 deportation order to be enforced.
This case has prompted renewed discussion on the challenges facing the UK’s immigration and judicial systems, particularly in how to address individuals with long-standing residency but persistent criminal activity. Legal experts point out that deportation appeals can be protracted, often raising complex questions about personal rights, public safety, and integration.
The Home Office has yet to comment on when Kapikanya’s deportation will be carried out, but the ruling marks a significant moment in one of the UK’s most enduring deportation battles. For now, the story underscores the delicate balancing act between upholding justice and recognising individual circumstances—a dynamic that continues to shape the British justice system.