False pretence, theft charges proved

Press, 13 November 1985, Page 4

False pretence, theft charges proved

Nelson reporter A man “suffering from delusions of grandeur” was convicted on 21 charges involving false pretence, theft, and breaches of hire purchase for goods and services, when he appeared in the District Court at Nelson yesterday. Judge Seeman sentenced Raymond Urbin Strawbridge, aged 32, an unemployed driver, of no fixed abode, to nine months periodic detention, to be followed by 18 months probation. He was also ordered to make restitution of $2456. To enable this, the Judge ordered forfeiture of money found in his possession ($844) and the disposal of his car. Any balance would then be paid at the rate of $3O a week.

Strawbridge had pleaded guilty to two breaches of hire purchase, 19 charges of fraudlently using documents to obtain a pecuniary advantage, and one of

theft. Sergeant P. D. Grooby said Strawbridge had sold a television set and video recorder owned by Vision Hire, valued at $2695, and a waterbed, dresser, and tallboy obtained on hire purchase from Land of Nod, for a total of $l2OO at a garage sale. Police enquiries showed that Strawbridge owed $2873 on the dresser, waterbed and tallboy, all of which had been recovered.

Further inquiries by the police showed that Strawbridge had established a fictitious trucking firm in Nelson using the name of Raeand Miko Independent Truckles, and had advertised the firm in the local newspaper, said Sergeant Grooby. At the time he had neither truck nor capital backing. Strawbridge had order forms, letter heads and business cards printed and used these, or attempted to use them, to obtain goods and services from various

firms and businesses.

The total amount of goods and services obtained amounted to $6063, and order forms had been issued for goods to a value of $180,655. The total amount of goods unrecovered was $2456, said Sergeant Grooby. When arrested, Strawbridge had admitted that his trucking firm was “a dream that got out of hand.”

Strawbridge had said that it was easy using the order forms, and if the business community had taken the trouble to check, he would have been caught much earlier.

In the schedule of charges for goods, presented to the court, the largest item was $170,999 for the attempted purchase of a truck. Other items related to office supplies, air and rail ferry fares, and motor-vehicle parts. Mr W. B. Rainey, referring to the false pretence

charges, said that at the time Strawbridge had the order forms printed there was no intention to defraud. He genuinely thought that he could set up a trucking business.

In some casas, after obtaining items and realising that there was not going to be a trucking business, he had returned the items obtained on credit. He had not taken delivery of the $170,999 truck — “he didn’t get anywhere near taking delivery,” said Mr Rainey. He took issue with the police summary of facts regarding the number of items recovered. Some of these items were never in Strawbridge’s hands, said Mr Rainey. The Judge said that Mr Rainey’s analysis disclosed that what appeared to be substantial fraudulent dealings involving goods and services to a value of $200,000 really came down to $2456, the amount unrecovered.