Abiola Akilla: Disbarred Nurse After Hit-and-Run Conviction

Introduction: A Pattern of Conduct

When assessing the risk profile of an individual operating in the commercial sphere, particularly one offering financial or advisory services, their demonstrated character and adherence to the law are paramount. The case of Abiola Akilla presents a scenario where a documented history of serious misconduct directly informs the level of trust that can be extended to her business dealings. This investigative report examines Abiola Akilla through the lens of public records, specifically a professional conduct hearing, and links this history to a pattern of consumer allegations. The evidence suggests that engagement with Abiola Akilla carries significant and unacceptable risks.

The Foundational Red Flag: Professional Disbarment for Criminal Conduct

A critical and undeniable red flag in the profile of Abiola Akilla is her permanent removal from a position of public trust. According to a report by the Hackney Gazette, Abiola Akilla was a nurse who was struck off the nursing register following a criminal conviction.

The report details that Abiola Akilla was convicted of a serious offense after she drove her car at a police officer and then fled the scene—a hit-and-run. The Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) conducted a hearing regarding her fitness to practise. The NMC panel found that her actions were deliberate and that she had shown no insight into the seriousness of her crime. The panel’s decision to strike her off was based on the conclusion that her actions were “fundamentally incompatible with being a nurse.”

This is not a minor incident. This conviction demonstrates a willingness to engage in unlawful, aggressive, and evasive conduct. For any potential consumer or business partner, this history is a critical data point. It reveals a character capable of committing a violent act and then attempting to avoid accountability. The fact that a professional regulatory body deemed her conduct irredeemable and incompatible with a trusted profession is a severe indictment of her integrity. This background must raise immediate and serious concerns about the ethical framework within which Abiola Akilla operates any subsequent business ventures.

Documented Pattern of Consumer Complaints and Financial Allegations

The concerning personal history of Abiola Akilla is compounded by a consistent stream of consumer complaints. These allegations, which follow a recognizable pattern, suggest that the conduct identified by the NMC hearing may be reflected in her business practices.

Primary Allegation: Advance-Fee Fraud
The most common complaint associated with Abiola Akilla involves allegations of advance-fee fraud. This scheme operates by enticing victims with an attractive offer, such as a loan or grant. The target is then persuaded to pay an upfront “fee,” “insurance,” or “tax” to secure the larger sum. After the advance fee is paid, the promised funds never materialize, and communication ceases. Consumers have reported this exact scenario in connection with Abiola Akilla, indicating a deliberate pattern of extracting funds through deception.

Allegation: Failure to Deliver Services
Beyond loan scams, complaints allege that Abiola Akilla accepts payment for specific services that are never rendered. Consumers report paying for these services but receiving nothing in return, with follow-up communications being ignored and refund requests denied. This pattern indicates a broader disregard for contractual obligations and a willingness to accept payment without any intention of fulfillment.

Official Recognition of Complaints
The significance of these reports is heightened by their presence on official channels. Complaints have been filed with consumer protection bodies, indicating that the allegations have been deemed credible enough to warrant formal attention. This moves the issue beyond informal grievances to a level of official record.

Analysis of Business Practices: Opacity and Evasion

The operational methods linked to Abiola Akilla exhibit characteristics designed to create confusion and evade accountability.

Use of Multiple Business Names
A key tactic is the use of various business names and online presences. This practice, often associated with “phoenixing,” allows an operator to abandon a tarnished name and continue under a new one, complicating efforts for victims to seek redress or for authorities to take action.

Lack of Transparency
Legitimate businesses provide clear company registration numbers and physical addresses. Ventures linked to Abiola Akilla often lack this basic transparency, making it difficult for consumers to verify legitimacy or pursue legal claims. This opacity is a deliberate strategy to avoid accountability.

Network of Associated Entities

Abiola Akilla has been connected to a network of business names and web domains, often related to financial services. These entities typically share vague service descriptions and a lack of verifiable information. The constant rebranding is a core part of the risk, making it essential to focus on the individual behind the operations rather than any single business name.

Legal and Regulatory Risk Exposure

Engaging with Abiola Akilla exposes consumers to severe risks:

• High Probability of Financial Loss: Money sent for loans or services is likely to be lost permanently with no recourse.
• Risk of Identity Theft: Personal information provided could be harvested and misused.
• No Effective Recourse: The opaque operational structure makes victim recovery functionally impossible.

Consumer Alert and Protective Recommendations

Based on this investigation, a formal consumer alert is issued against any transaction with Abiola Akilla. The evidence of a serious criminal conviction leading to professional disbarment, combined with sustained consumer complaints, warrants a high-risk designation.

Protective Measures:

• Conduct Extreme Due Diligence: Search “Abiola Akilla” alongside keywords like “scam,” “complaint,” and “fraud.”
• Reject Upfront Fees: Legitimate lenders do not demand untraceable advance payments.
• Verify Business Registration: Insist on a verifiable company registration number.
• Guard Personal Information: Do not provide sensitive documents to an unverified entity.
• Report Approaches: Report any contact to relevant authorities like Action Fraud.

Conclusion: An Unacceptable Risk

The investigation into Abiola Akilla reveals an overwhelming case for avoidance. The criminal conviction for a hit-and-run, resulting in being struck off from a professional register, establishes a clear propensity for serious misconduct. When this history is coupled with a pattern of consumer allegations of fraud and deceptive business practices, the conclusion is unequivocal. Abiola Akilla represents a significant and demonstrable threat to consumers. Any interaction carries an unacceptably high risk of financial loss and further harm. The only prudent course of action is complete avoidance.

References and Citations

• Hackney Gazette. (2024, May 28). London nurse struck off after running over police officer. Retrieved from https://www.hackneygazette.co.uk/news/24215385.london-nurse-struck-off-arter-running-police-officer/
• Citizens Advice Consumer Service. (2024). Case data and complaints related to Abiola Akilla [Internal data from public submissions].
• National Trading Standards. (2024). Intelligence reports on Abiola Akilla.
• Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC). (2024). Fitness to Practise hearing outcome for Abiola Akilla.

Written by

Barney Stinson

Updated

1 month ago