Rogue traders spared prison after £291k cold calling housing repair fraud

The pair worked across Nottinghamshire and further afield. Credit: ITV Central.

Listen to Valerie and Raymond's story after they fell victim to the scam

Two rogue traders have been spared prison after conning elderly and vulnerable people across the East Midlands, taking cash up front for shoddy housing repairs.

Gareth Bryan, 34, of Lytham Gardens, Bestwood, and Martin Jacks, 35, of Wellesley Crescent, Broxtowe were handed sentences of 2 years each, suspended for two years.

The sentencing follows a complex four-year investigation by the Scambusters Trading Standards Central England team, after each admitted three counts of fraudulent trading. Bryan also admitted a charge of money laundering, and concealing criminal property.

Investigators from Scambusters estimate they swindled around 80 customers in Nottinghamshire and further afield, out of an estimated total of £291,000 for shoddy housing repair works.

Two of the victims were disabled couple 62-year-old Valerie Watson from Bulwell and her partner Raymond Fairgrieve, 72.

Disabled couple Valerie & Raymond were targeted by the conmen. Credit: ITV Central

Bryan and Jacks promised to fix tiles and treat the roof for moss growth if the couple paid up £1,100 in cash up front.

They began the work but never returned to complete it. The money was all of Valerie’s savings, which she had been collecting to buy herself a new electric wheelchair.

The couple say they've been left hurt by being tricked out of their money, and it's made them feel less safe in their own home.

Gareth Bryan & Martin Jacks never finished the work after being paid cash in hand upfront. Credit: ITV Central

During sentencing the judge said it was a significant and severe case of dishonesty by Bryan and Jacks, describing their crimes as "systematic overpricing over a long period of time, high pressure selling and demand for quick payment."

He also said they carried out systematic shoddy work, with nothing to divide the pair in terms of culpability.

However the judge decided to suspend the sentences because some work was done, some poor work was remedied, and not all of their work was fraudulent.