Jon Andrewes called himself a “doctor” and faked a number PhDs on his CV to become a chairman of two separate NHS trusts and a hospice.

He made £1million off the scam but following a Supreme Court hearing has been told to pay back £96,000.

Andrewes was jailed for two years in 2017 when the court heard he led an “outwardly prestigious life based on a staggering series of lies”.

The 63-year-old from Totnes, Devon lied his way to the top into three roles, including at two south-west NHS trusts.

Despite obtaining the six-figure salary the only qualifications he had were a higher education certificate in social work from the 1970s and a PGCE in teaching.

He also lied about obtaining degrees from three separate universities when in reality he began his career as a builder and spent much of his time as a probation officer, customs officer, or youth worker.

Andrewes beat off hundreds of candidates to land the three prestigious roles, including seeing off 117 rivals to become chair of the Royal Cornwall Hospital Trust where he earned over £1million.

However, his web of lies fell apart in 2016 when bosses found out his impressive credentials were entirely made up.

In 2017, Andrewes admitted two charges of dishonestly making a false representation in relation to gain as chairman of Torbay NHS Care Trust in 2007 and Royal Cornwall Hospital Trust in 2015.

He also pleaded guilty to making a financial gain in relation to his role as chief executive of St Margaret's Hospice in Taunton, Somerset, in 2004.

Following Andrewes being slapped with the huge payback, the confiscation hearing also determined what assets Andrewes held and what could be disposed of in order to reimburse the public purse.

This included his three-bedroom detached home in the South Devon village of Stoke Gabriel, worth an estimated £423,000 according to a property website.

However, Andrewes then successfully appealed against the confiscation order meaning he didn’t have to pay up.

A Supreme Court spokesman said: "The Court of Appeal allowed Mr Andrewes' appeal, making no confiscation order, and certified the question of whether or not a confiscation order in such circumstances would be disproportionate as a point of law of general public importance."