Pub owned by brewery

Manxman_in_exile

diggerDan696969 said:

Thrugelmir said:

diggerDan696969 said:

Thrugelmir said:

diggerDan696969 said:

O yes … and the wife is co-owner of the building firm, the pub upstairs is the building firms office, that’s the connection.

Doesn't seem to warrant statements such as 

it’s actually because I want to tell the brewery that their manager is a very untrustworthy person

What action have you taken to pursue the business itself? 

Doesn’t warrant a statement like that, very true, I wanted to say a lot worse than that !!!! I’ve had debt collection companies issue letters, I’ve had receivers issue letters of demand, I’ve contacted the police, as I said earlier I’ve accepted the business offer of paying back monthly, 5 months later still waiting for the first payment….. I’ve had the bank try get my money back, and more …..so I’ve done quite a bit to “pursue” the business 

Still no justification to start a personal vendetta against an individual just because they have a connection to the business.  

True, unless your name is on the bottom of the receipt from the building company, which hers is 

Somebody's signature on a receipt is only evidence that they've given you a receipt for £nnnn.  It's not necessarily evidence of fraud.

Sandtree

diggerDan696969 said:

Thrugelmir said:

diggerDan696969 said:

Thrugelmir said:

diggerDan696969 said:

O yes … and the wife is co-owner of the building firm, the pub upstairs is the building firms office, that’s the connection.

Doesn't seem to warrant statements such as 

it’s actually because I want to tell the brewery that their manager is a very untrustworthy person

What action have you taken to pursue the business itself? 

Doesn’t warrant a statement like that, very true, I wanted to say a lot worse than that !!!! I’ve had debt collection companies issue letters, I’ve had receivers issue letters of demand, I’ve contacted the police, as I said earlier I’ve accepted the business offer of paying back monthly, 5 months later still waiting for the first payment….. I’ve had the bank try get my money back, and more …..so I’ve done quite a bit to “pursue” the business 

Still no justification to start a personal vendetta against an individual just because they have a connection to the business.  

True, unless your name is on the bottom of the receipt from the building company, which hers is 

Receipts arent normally signed but to be honest if a person is a statutory director according to Companies House is probably more relevant an indication of their level of involvement than if they are the grunt on the front line signing receipts.

DB1904

user1977 said:

DB1904 said:

user1977 said:

diggerDan696969 said:

Certainly has, it’s called deceit, taking my money without any intention of providing the service paid for. 

They may not have provided the service paid for, but what's the evidence of criminality? What did the police say?

If the OP is reporting a crime, what additional verifiable information can you see indicating one hasn't taken place?

That's an interesting reversal of the burden of proof! All we know is that the OP has paid a contractor who hasn't (yet) performed what they were contracted to do. That does not constitute a crime.

You seem to know a lot about what is or isn't a crime. Yet you appear uneducated on what the Home Office counting rules say about crime recording. 

Thrugelmir

Manxman_in_exile said:

diggerDan696969 said:

Thrugelmir said:

diggerDan696969 said:

Thrugelmir said:

diggerDan696969 said:

O yes … and the wife is co-owner of the building firm, the pub upstairs is the building firms office, that’s the connection.

Doesn't seem to warrant statements such as 

it’s actually because I want to tell the brewery that their manager is a very untrustworthy person

What action have you taken to pursue the business itself? 

Doesn’t warrant a statement like that, very true, I wanted to say a lot worse than that !!!! I’ve had debt collection companies issue letters, I’ve had receivers issue letters of demand, I’ve contacted the police, as I said earlier I’ve accepted the business offer of paying back monthly, 5 months later still waiting for the first payment….. I’ve had the bank try get my money back, and more …..so I’ve done quite a bit to “pursue” the business 

Still no justification to start a personal vendetta against an individual just because they have a connection to the business.  

True, unless your name is on the bottom of the receipt from the building company, which hers is 

Somebody's signature on a receipt is only evidence that they've given you a receipt for £nnnn.  It's not necessarily evidence of fraud.

Unlikely to be a signature. Just a printed name of the business owners. 

DB1904

Manxman_in_exile said:

DB1904 said:

user1977 said:

diggerDan696969 said:

Certainly has, it’s called deceit, taking my money without any intention of providing the service paid for. 

They may not have provided the service paid for, but what's the evidence of criminality? What did the police say?

If the OP is reporting a crime, what additional verifiable information can you see indicating one hasn't taken place?

Perhaps I'm being particularly thick this evening, but I don't understand your response to user1977's post.  Are you disagreeing with him and saying that there is evidence of criminality, or agreeing that there is no evidence of criminality?

(I think that what user1977 was suggesting was that there wasn't necessarily any evidence of dishonesty based on what the OP has said, because the OP doesn't know what the intent of the people who took his money was at the time they took it.  Indeed, we know none of the details of what has happened at all except that the OP thinks he is a victim of deceit/fraud.  It would be useful to know what has actually happened).

One could argue it was dishonestly appropriated when they failed to return it and had no intention of completing the work. That is theft. 

JJC1956

If you need to know the name of the pub owners, whether they be a brewery, multiple lessee, pub company, freeholder etc why don’t you contact the local licensing officer, the area I live, the police used to deal with licensing matters but now it is the local council. Maybe they can help you find the owners, I’m not sure how that will help your predicament but you never know, maybe the letting company or brewery might not be happy that another business is being run from their premises. 

user1977

DB1904 said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

DB1904 said:

user1977 said:

diggerDan696969 said:

Certainly has, it’s called deceit, taking my money without any intention of providing the service paid for. 

They may not have provided the service paid for, but what's the evidence of criminality? What did the police say?

If the OP is reporting a crime, what additional verifiable information can you see indicating one hasn't taken place?

Perhaps I'm being particularly thick this evening, but I don't understand your response to user1977's post.  Are you disagreeing with him and saying that there is evidence of criminality, or agreeing that there is no evidence of criminality?

(I think that what user1977 was suggesting was that there wasn't necessarily any evidence of dishonesty based on what the OP has said, because the OP doesn't know what the intent of the people who took his money was at the time they took it.  Indeed, we know none of the details of what has happened at all except that the OP thinks he is a victim of deceit/fraud.  It would be useful to know what has actually happened).

One could argue it was dishonestly appropriated when they failed to return it and had no intention of completing the work. That is theft. 

The point is you need to prove the lack of intention. I've never heard of a business being prosecuted because they've been too slow in doing the work they've been paid to do.

Besides, even if the police were interested, it's not their job to recover the debt on behalf of the OP.

Manxman_in_exile

DB1904 said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

DB1904 said:

user1977 said:

diggerDan696969 said:

Certainly has, it’s called deceit, taking my money without any intention of providing the service paid for. 

They may not have provided the service paid for, but what's the evidence of criminality? What did the police say?

If the OP is reporting a crime, what additional verifiable information can you see indicating one hasn't taken place?

Perhaps I'm being particularly thick this evening, but I don't understand your response to user1977's post.  Are you disagreeing with him and saying that there is evidence of criminality, or agreeing that there is no evidence of criminality?

(I think that what user1977 was suggesting was that there wasn't necessarily any evidence of dishonesty based on what the OP has said, because the OP doesn't know what the intent of the people who took his money was at the time they took it.  Indeed, we know none of the details of what has happened at all except that the OP thinks he is a victim of deceit/fraud.  It would be useful to know what has actually happened).

One could argue it was dishonestly appropriated when they failed to return it and had no intention of completing the work. That is theft. 

But none of us know exactly what has happened!  The OP is remarkably light on any informative detail.

DB1904

user1977 said:

DB1904 said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

DB1904 said:

user1977 said:

diggerDan696969 said:

Certainly has, it’s called deceit, taking my money without any intention of providing the service paid for. 

They may not have provided the service paid for, but what's the evidence of criminality? What did the police say?

If the OP is reporting a crime, what additional verifiable information can you see indicating one hasn't taken place?

Perhaps I'm being particularly thick this evening, but I don't understand your response to user1977's post.  Are you disagreeing with him and saying that there is evidence of criminality, or agreeing that there is no evidence of criminality?

(I think that what user1977 was suggesting was that there wasn't necessarily any evidence of dishonesty based on what the OP has said, because the OP doesn't know what the intent of the people who took his money was at the time they took it.  Indeed, we know none of the details of what has happened at all except that the OP thinks he is a victim of deceit/fraud.  It would be useful to know what has actually happened).

One could argue it was dishonestly appropriated when they failed to return it and had no intention of completing the work. That is theft. 

The point is you need to prove the lack of intention. I've never heard of a business being prosecuted because they've been too slow in doing the work they've been paid to do.

Besides, even if the police were interested, it's not their job to recover the debt on behalf of the OP.

No you don't, read the points to prove for theft. 

DB1904

Manxman_in_exile said:

DB1904 said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

DB1904 said:

user1977 said:

diggerDan696969 said:

Certainly has, it’s called deceit, taking my money without any intention of providing the service paid for. 

They may not have provided the service paid for, but what's the evidence of criminality? What did the police say?

If the OP is reporting a crime, what additional verifiable information can you see indicating one hasn't taken place?

Perhaps I'm being particularly thick this evening, but I don't understand your response to user1977's post.  Are you disagreeing with him and saying that there is evidence of criminality, or agreeing that there is no evidence of criminality?

(I think that what user1977 was suggesting was that there wasn't necessarily any evidence of dishonesty based on what the OP has said, because the OP doesn't know what the intent of the people who took his money was at the time they took it.  Indeed, we know none of the details of what has happened at all except that the OP thinks he is a victim of deceit/fraud.  It would be useful to know what has actually happened).

One could argue it was dishonestly appropriated when they failed to return it and had no intention of completing the work. That is theft. 

But none of us know exactly what has happened!  The OP is remarkably light on any informative detail.

Same with any other thread on here, yet you have an opinion about this one.