A guesthouse owner who lost nearly £10,000 to a conman is angry that police did not prosecute the fraudster over their unpaid bill.
North Yorkshire Police told Riccall guesthouse owner Sue Taylor that Michael Luck’s non payment for a prolonged stay by himself and his family was a civil matter.
Wha..?
Mrs Taylor told police: “You will hear this name again” and less than three months later, Luck defrauded Michael Bartram, of Abbey Travel, out of £5,375 by getting and not paying for airline tickets.
Ha ha ha ha! I hope Abbey Travel sue NYP for costs...
This time police did prosecute him and Luck, 72, of Church Street, Bubwith, received a ten-week prison sentence suspended for 12 months and was ordered to pay £5,375 compensation.
/facepalm
Now Mrs Taylor wants to know why the police took a different approach with her and her husband when Luck used similar tactics in both cases.
Yes, indeed. So do I...
She believes that if police had prosecuted her case, then the travel agency fraud may not have happened.
You mean, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure? That's crazy talk!
A spokesman for North Yorkshire Police said of the decision not to prosecute the guesthouse fraud: “It would not be appropriate to comment on this case as no-one was charged with any criminal offences.
“Each case is dealt with on an individual basis. If it is believed that the investigation has gathered enough evidence to support a successful prosecution, the case will be put before the courts.”
So, basically, you didn't gather enough evidence in the first case? Or do you just
prefer the lazy option of pressing 'Print Screen' these days?
17 comments:
XX “It would not be appropriate to comment on this case as no-one was charged with any criminal offences. XX
Talk about circular arguments!
Is this bastard a Jesuit, or what?
"Luck defrauded Michael Bartram, of Abbey Travel, out of £5,375 by getting and not paying for airline tickets.
This time police did prosecute him and Luck, 72, of Church Street, Bubwith, received a ten-week prison sentence suspended for 12 months and was ordered to pay £5,375 compensation."
So is that £5,375 "compensation" plus the £5,375 for the tickets, or, was Luck in a win-win situation of paying no more money even when caught?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but 'obtaining goods or services by deception' is a criminal offence under the Theft Act...
So, basically, you didn't gather enough evidence in the first case?
Worse than that. Can't be arsed.
In the second case there would have been paperwork, entries on a computer, actual physical tickets maybe and possibly a rubbery cheque or promise to pay.
And you know how the modern copper likes their gadgets and technology.
In the first case it was probably more a verbal thing, the miscreant turning up at reception and saying "I'd like to stay at your fine establishment Inn Keep?".
Investigating this would be soooo Dixon of Dock Green. Involving notebooks, pencils, writing down stuff about who said what and when, and trips out in the station's pool panda... you know, the boring one without the loud siren, big blue flashing lights and go faster yellow stripe. How tiresome. Time that could be better spent trawling Twitter or Facebook, or picking up the gay partners of Guardian journalists surely?
Whut???
No "victim surcharge"!!!!
What are they thinking up there in North Yorkshire?
Unfortunately, there are quite a few people who do this sort of thing and seem to get away with it.
With regards to the guest-house stay, either the person intended to leave without paying the bill, in which case it was fraud, or he intended to pay but at the last minute decided not to, in which case it's making off without payment, both of which are crimeable. The only way it could be construed as a civil debt is if the offender paid a small sum towards the bill and invited the guest-house owner to sue him for the remainder. I would suggest that a good solicitor could see NYP being sued for incompetence, negligence, malfeasance in a public office or something similar. Another way is if the guest house owner takes action against Chief Constable in the small claims court, as the person who decided to take no Police action made that decision with the implied knowledge and permission of the Chief, making him/her liable, though only £5,000 is the maximum which can be claimed. The resultant publicity would probably end the Chief's plans for elevation to the Lords on retirement and I would suggest the Force Solicitor would quickly try and strike a deal. It's a pity that victims of such crimes can't do a form of Trip Advisor, where they can post photographs of the guests from hell onto a website visited by hotels and guest-house owners and the reasons why they don't want them back again.
Penseivat
It's a pity that victims of such crimes can't do a form of Trip Advisor, where they can post photographs of the guests from hell onto a website visited by hotels and guest-house owners and the reasons why they don't want them back again.
Can't they?
A generous crossing of plod palms with silver during initial 'inquiries' can often elevate the non-mason, or second-class citizen, to a response status enjoyed by Brethren, Mrs Taylor.
She should have claimed that Luck called her a parki fagot.
He'd be on Death Row now.
Instead of running to the papers this victim should sue the police if she has a good enough case.If they have done wrong then make them pay,but it rarely happens even on a slam-dunk like this one.Why is that?
As for your snide comments Melvin,please rush to the station and report these officers who are taking bribes.Sorry...you can't prove anything? Sound of tumbleweed.....
Jaded
Luck gave them a bouncing cheque five times...
I had a similar experience investigating a con man who had been spending cheques with no money in the bank account.
The CPS conclusion was that it was a civil debt and he walked..
"Sorry...you can't prove anything?"
The burden of proof is directly proportional to the extent of police corruption. But you will be lost already, and I must take the long route...just for you.
1. Plod sources of free drinks, meals, and other gratuities.
Review your sources of kickbacks - those payments received as a result of referring citizens to other businesses.
2. Plod theft from arrestees, crime victims or their corpses.
3. Plod bribes or favours for not pursuing a proper criminal investigation or for 'losing' vital evidence.
3. Plod income from protection rackets, which include payments from brothel keepers, illegal gambling operations, drug dealers and human traffic gangs.
4. Plod income as a result of fixing criminal prosecutions by withholding evidence or failing to appear at judicial hearings, for reward or as a Masonic favor.
5. Plod income derived from direct criminal activities.
6. Internal plod 'pay' such as shifts and holidays, bought and sold.
7. The planting or adding to evidence, especially in drug cases or when the arrestee expires in the course of 'apprehension.'
8. Ticket fixing: plod cancelling traffic tickets as favours to friends and family of others.
Should I remain ecstatic with the fact that plod convictions occur at all, WC Jaded?
A series or list of paranoid ramblings and wishfull thinking is not PROOF, which is what was asked for.
AS an exXX ABERDEEN FISH GUTTER and
MARINNESIICKERRUNGSTRUPPERER firearms instructor, Marksman 1st class on pistel, rifel, light and hevvy machine gunz, i AGREE witth Furor Tutonicus you Insel imbicile.
XX
Ragnar von Streuth
von Battenberg-Pußy.
Why Melvyn, You excel yourself! You8 really are SO funny and witty.
If you could stop wanking long enough, you may even make it onto the stage.
The landing stage of the Mersey ferry.
Don't go falling in now! NOT That I would want any one to push you, of course.
Wow Melvin you've seen all that from your staring window in the mental hospital? When do you have time for feeding the ducks and taking your bed-bath?
Back in the real world I could do a long list of good work by police officers every day that doesn't make headlines which would easily outweigh the tiny amount of wrong-doings by corrupt police.
Nice to see you are now impersonating FT.Who's next?
Jaded.
"Talk about circular arguments!"
Indeed!
"Correct me if I'm wrong, but 'obtaining goods or services by deception' is a criminal offence under the Theft Act..."
Yes, but as John points out, they just can't be arsed...
"I would suggest that a good solicitor could see NYP being sued for incompetence, negligence, malfeasance in a public office or something similar."
I would pay good money to see that!
Post a Comment