The dealer that cannot be named

I totally agree about the medal - time after time people have posted about their awful experiences saying "I thought this was a one off, that I was the only person it had happened to, I had done my due diligence and all I could find was glowing reviews" yet it took one brave lady who wasn't even currently owed money to start this group and just 4 weeks later we have a major police investigation and over 3,850 people taking comfort from the fact that they were not alone. Several have been refunded by their banks because of the volume of people reporting her fraud.
 
There was a post on one of the DD pages by someone who was basically shaming the victims for taking the horses on trial. Didn’t go down well. And then an ally of theirs joined in and said that the dealer in question had always been good with them, and ‘there’s two sides to every story.”
I nearly spat my tea out. So here are the “two sides”…
On one side we have a dealer and a few of her allies who seem to think it’s all the fault of the buyers.
On the other side we have dozens of people who have been treated appallingly, some who have been seriously injured by dangerous horses, plus a huge amount of money owed to them (currently totalling the best part of half a million quid.) And then there’s the people who sold their horses through this dealer - some of them are *very* unhappy!
Hmmm. Two sides to every story.

And of course we have the poor horses, passed around from pillar to post. The whole thing is utterly shocking.
 
For those of you who aren't bored with me banging on 🤣 tonight's news is that she might have been/is trading somewhere in Kent. Lady recognised pony called Tallulah/Rosie with very distinctive markings - which was being offered on trial:eek:. Horsequest have now pulled the advert. What does it take to stop this evil woman?:mad:😭
 
Nancykitt said:
There was a post on one of the DD pages by someone who was basically shaming the victims for taking the horses on trial. Didn’t go down well. And then an ally of theirs joined in and said that the dealer in question had always been good with them, and ‘there’s two sides to every story.”
I nearly spat my tea out. So here are the “two sides”…
On one side we have a dealer and a few of her allies who seem to think it’s all the fault of the buyers.
On the other side we have dozens of people who have been treated appallingly, some who have been seriously injured by dangerous horses, plus a huge amount of money owed to them (currently totalling the best part of half a million quid.) And then there’s the people who sold their horses through this dealer - some of them are *very* unhappy!
Hmmm. Two sides to every story.

And of course we have the poor horses, passed around from pillar to post. The whole thing is utterly shocking.
Click to expand...
If that's the same post I saw I don't think that's an entirely fair representation of it. Tbh just because you don't agree with the trial aspect of it - I certainly still can't get my head round it tbh - doesn't mean you think the victims deserve what happened or that you are siding with the dealer.
 
wills_91 said:
If that's the same post I saw I don't think that's an entirely fair representation of it. Tbh just because you don't agree with the trial aspect of it - I certainly still can't get my head round it tbh - doesn't mean you think the victims deserve what happened or that you are siding with the dealer.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure it’s the same post. It was on a DD page and the person posting it turned off comments. They were basically criticising the FB page that has been set up as well as saying that people shouldn’t buy blind & some of the victims were disagreeing with her. Another person, commenting on the FB page, said ‘…at no point have these people thought about the facts, there’s one of her (ie the dealer) and hundreds of them and positive posts are not being shown it can’t go on forever these people need to find something else to do with time in the day now as it’s getting boring.’
In a follow up post the same person said ‘…she (ie the dealer) has always been good to me and people are forgetting that there’s only one side to the story on that page.’
It was the suggestion that there were actually two sides to the story that got me.
(And of course there’s a lot of negative stuff in the FB page because it was set up for the purpose of sharing people’s negative experiences! It’s just unfortunate that the person who commented was finding it all ‘boring’.)
 
Last edited:
Nancykitt said:
I don’t think it’s the same post. It was on a DD page and the person posting it turned off comments. Another person-not the OP- was saying that the dealer in question had always been good to her, but it was the ‘two sides to every story’ bit that got me as it implied that no-one had heard the dealer’s side.
Click to expand...
Ah I understand now.
 
Caski said:
It is rather a pity that the identity of said dealer could not be shared, at least the public could be aware of what she looks like!
Click to expand...
Unfortunately it won't necessarily help as there will likely be another dealer fronting for her now. Her bank has had to refund some folks (out of their own funds) and has had a large number of fraud reports so that account will almost certainly be frozen so she needs another dodgy to handle the money for her if she wants to still trade.
 
New Forests Rock said:
For those of you who aren't bored with me banging on 🤣 tonight's news is that she might have been/is trading somewhere in Kent. Lady recognised pony called Tallulah/Rosie with very distinctive markings - which was being offered on trial:eek:. Horsequest have now pulled the advert. What does it take to stop this evil woman?:mad:😭
Click to expand...
Did you see the bankruptcy number she has been sending to people?

I think the number she has provided, BKT5181064, is her reference. Nothing is showing on the insolvency register yet under her name or the business name.

SWSNBN clearly hasn't the brains to understand that filing for bankruptcy does not absolve her of her crimes.
 
Classification of a Category 1 Fraud Under the Fraud Act 2006, the repeated sale of a single asset to multiple parties while withholding known health or safety issues meets the criteria for Fraud by False Representation. Given an estimated total loss of £500,000, this is classified as a Category 1 offense, which carries a sentencing starting point of 3 to 10 years in custody.

A drip feed refund pattern, where a single buyer is repaid in numerous small instalments over several months, is considered textbook evidence of insolvency. Legally, continuing to accept new five figure payments from fresh buyers while being unable to refund previous ones constitutes Fraudulent Trading under the Insolvency Act 1986.

Under the Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA), authorities have the power to investigate a criminal lifestyle. This allows the court to issue Confiscation Orders to seize and liquidate personal assets, including property, vehicles, and horseboxes, to repay the money owed to victims.

Unlike standard commercial or consumer debt, debts incurred through proven fraud are generally not dischargeable through bankruptcy. This means an individual remains personally liable for the full amount until every victim is repaid in full, regardless of the future status of the business.

The court can issue a Disqualification Order for up to 15 years, legally banning an individual from managing, forming, or being a director of any business or trade.
 
pootler said:
Classification of a Category 1 Fraud Under the Fraud Act 2006, the repeated sale of a single asset to multiple parties while withholding known health or safety issues meets the criteria for Fraud by False Representation. Given an estimated total loss of £500,000, this is classified as a Category 1 offense, which carries a sentencing starting point of 3 to 10 years in custody.

A drip feed refund pattern, where a single buyer is repaid in numerous small instalments over several months, is considered textbook evidence of insolvency. Legally, continuing to accept new five figure payments from fresh buyers while being unable to refund previous ones constitutes Fraudulent Trading under the Insolvency Act 1986.

Under the Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA), authorities have the power to investigate a criminal lifestyle. This allows the court to issue Confiscation Orders to seize and liquidate personal assets, including property, vehicles, and horseboxes, to repay the money owed to victims.

Unlike standard commercial or consumer debt, debts incurred through proven fraud are generally not dischargeable through bankruptcy. This means an individual remains personally liable for the full amount until every victim is repaid in full, regardless of the future status of the business.

The court can issue a Disqualification Order for up to 15 years, legally banning an individual from managing, forming, or being a director of any business or trade.
Click to expand...
Very interesting. Thank you.

On the point about numerous small instalments, is it possible in this case (and she might argue) that the small instalments were due to limitations on bank payments per day as opposed to insolvency? She might claim that the money was available but that there was insufficient to refund all of the buyers she had to, so she opted to send small amounts to each to indicate that she was paying them.
 
Abacus said:
On the point about numerous small instalments, is it possible in this case (and she might argue) that the small instalments were due to limitations on bank payments per day as opposed to insolvency? She might claim that the money was available but that there was insufficient to refund all of the buyers she had to, so she opted to send small amounts to each to indicate that she was paying them.
Click to expand...
It makes no difference what her daft excuse is for not paying back the customers promptly. There is a very clear legal requirement about this. If she's running a business she needs to have a bank account that supports this and in fact most banks have a very high daily allowance.

www.gov.uk

Accepting returns and giving refunds: the law

When you do and do not have to offer a refund, repair or replacement, unconditional refunds for online purchases, and penalties for deceiving customers
www.gov.uk www.gov.uk

This is the very pertinant bit for many of these victims. So she is still breaking the law if she hasn't refunded the total within 14 days and also has not refunded the transport costs, it doesn't matter what her contract says you still have these legal rights. Hopefully trading standards and the police will take action on this as well as those who are still out of pocket.

1772293159419.png
 
I dread to think what might be considered 'standard delivery', open pickup truck as often seen in some foreign climes........ imagine!
 
pootler said:
Classification of a Category 1 Fraud Under the Fraud Act 2006, the repeated sale of a single asset to multiple parties while withholding known health or safety issues meets the criteria for Fraud by False Representation. Given an estimated total loss of £500,000, this is classified as a Category 1 offense, which carries a sentencing starting point of 3 to 10 years in custody.

A drip feed refund pattern, where a single buyer is repaid in numerous small instalments over several months, is considered textbook evidence of insolvency. Legally, continuing to accept new five figure payments from fresh buyers while being unable to refund previous ones constitutes Fraudulent Trading under the Insolvency Act 1986.

Under the Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA), authorities have the power to investigate a criminal lifestyle. This allows the court to issue Confiscation Orders to seize and liquidate personal assets, including property, vehicles, and horseboxes, to repay the money owed to victims.

Unlike standard commercial or consumer debt, debts incurred through proven fraud are generally not dischargeable through bankruptcy. This means an individual remains personally liable for the full amount until every victim is repaid in full, regardless of the future status of the business.

The court can issue a Disqualification Order for up to 15 years, legally banning an individual from managing, forming, or being a director of any business or trade
Click to expand...

Really comprehensive, thank you. I hope the parties affected all keep up the pressure to get a just result
 
U.N.Owen said:
On dodgy dealers the truth page...

No more posts re B* S*, whilst we are impartial it's clear there is an unwarranted witch hunt against this woman. We receive additional info and this is totally undeserved.

I've edited out the name.
Click to expand...
Unwarranted witch hunt - tell that to the badly injured people, to those with very little chance of ever seeing their money again, and to all those poor broken horses 😭 :mad: I'm speechless (and that doesn't happen often🤣)
 
U.N.Owen said:
Comments now turned off for it....I do wonder what she does to have so many of these dodgy dealers groups on her side.
Click to expand...
Threatens then pays them I suspect.
I also suspect that there's a large group of dealers involved. All of who will be willing to have her head on a chopping block should they be exposed.

After all these horses came from some where. Some totally disappeared..
 
jhoward said:
Threatens then pays them I suspect.
I also suspect that there's a large group of dealers involved. All of who will be willing to have her head on a chopping block should they be exposed.

After all these horses came from some where. Some totally disappeared..
Click to expand...
I was told by a good sources that she was the admin for DD!!,, IF that is correct, then what better way to make others look bad and yourself impeccable! Clever!
 
New Forests Rock said:
Unwarranted witch hunt - tell that to the badly injured people, to those with very little chance of ever seeing their money again, and to all those poor broken horses 😭 :mad: I'm speechless (and that doesn't happen often🤣)
Click to expand...
My friend almost got killed by one of her horses. It’s injured many, so why is it a witch hunt! All the comments are based on fact. She can’t edit those.
 
U.N.Owen said:
Comments now turned off for it....I do wonder what she does to have so many of these dodgy dealers groups on her side.
Click to expand...
I was told by a good source that SHE WAS THE ADMIN FOR DD!! IF this is correct, then what a way to make others look bad and yourself very credible! Clever!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top