I doubt simply "finding out" would guarantee enforcement. They'd need time and an inclination to care, and tangible evidence. If there was no crime by the issuer other than being a little too trustworthy, it's unclear what the prioritization and penalties would be.

I suspect the bigger risk is that the buyer – the not-really-'accredited' – has some dispute with the company and sues, causing problems because the various assumptions-of-competence (that come with 'accredited' status) are then voided. It gives a bad-faith or disgruntled investor more leverage over the issuer.

Has any individual ever been charged with fraud for misrepresenting their wealth? I understand its likely that the company faces fines and such, but I've never heard of an individual getting in trouble.

Well, the company could certainly be in hot water for selling to a non-accredited investor, but I've yet to see anyone who can point to a penalty that can be levied against the lying investor.