A PAIR of fraudsters who conned a man out of thousands of pounds for a van have been prosecuted by Flintshire County Council.

The authority brought the case against 42-year-old Jonathan Gibson and 41-year-old Richard Mercer after trading standards officers learned of concerns about their advertisement and sale of vehicles.

Gibson, of Turning lane in Scarisbrick, Southport, appeared alongside Mercer, of Boundary Close in Southport, for sentence on Monday afternoon after both men admitted two fraud related offences.

Lee Reynolds, prosecuting on behalf of the council, told the court that the victim in the case was a man named Jordan Pritchard.

In 2021, he used an online auction site to find a campervan for himself and his family.

The site sold accident-damaged vehicles to businesses and members of the public.

He settled on one, described as a white-panelled van, with an estimated value of just under £7,500.

It gave the impression of being an Auto-Sleeper Warwick Duo, and Mr Pritchard felt it was a good investment.

Despite asking numerous times for more images and details, he was told staff weren't allowed to go in the van due to "glass infestation" and covid policies.

In the end, he paid just over £15,000.

When it was dropped off in May 2021, Mr Pritchard discovered the vehicle was effectively "just a plain van" and it was not an Auto-Sleeper at all.

A considerable amount of work had gone into making the vehicle look like an expensive Auto-Sleeper in the photos, the court heard, and efforts had also been undertaken to make sure anyone looking at buying it wouldn't be able to look inside - and would have to rely on the photos the seller supplied.

MORE COURT NEWS

The victim learned that the £15,000 van he'd just bought was only worth around £1,500.

Mercer and Gibson were traced and identified as the responsible parties for the fraud.

Mr Reynolds said it had been a "pure joint enterprise" and when officers investigated, a second vehicle was discovered which had been made to look like an expensive Auto-Sleeper.

The court also heard that following agreement prior to the sentencing hearing, a sum of £15,000 had already been repaid by Gibson to the victim, and a further £15,000 had already been paid by him by way of court costs.

Clarifying the defendants' roles in the fraud, Judge Rhys Rowlands said Gibson was the one to whom the vehicles belonged, and Mercer was the one responsible for getting them in a condition good enough to pass off as a better model.

Daniel Travers, defending Gibson, told the court: "Mr Gibson accepts full responsibility for his involvement and does in open court make an apology to Mr Mercer for involving him.

"He brings a bag today, knowing custody is a realistic prospect.

"He's had this hanging over his head for a long time now.

"Mr Gibson has repaid the money and I make it clear that's had significant personal and financial consequences for him because he didn't have the money himself.

"He had to borrow more than half of it from close family or friends and he's had to take out a substantial amount on a credit card which he's repaying at an exorbitant rate.

"But he did that because he felt the money should be repaid to Mr Pritchard."

David Birrell, defending Mercer, said of his defendant: "Undoubtedly he was the man in the trade; he has his own bodywork shop, which is going from strength to strength.

"I know Your Honour has seen the pre-sentence report, and I hope you would agree it's a good report.

The Leader:

"The risk of reconviction is assessed as very low and he is remorseful.

"He's a hard working man and employs two people."

Judge Rowlands told the defendants: "There was planning here, and a significant degree of sophistication.

"Your dishonesty was assisted by taking advantage of the rules an regime of the Covid pandemic."

The Judge opted to draw back from immediate custody in both of the defendants' cases.

As such Gibson received 15 months suspended for 18 months, with 180 hours of unpaid work.

And Mercer received 12 months suspended for 18 months, with 120 hours of unpaid work.

Both defendants must pay a £156 victim surcharge.