Essex and London Construction - client experiences

04/09/2026

THE COWBOY BUILDER PLAYBOOK DOESN’T NECESSARILY END WHEN THE WORK STOPS

Think the nightmare ends when the builder walks off site? It often doesn’t.

For some operators, abandoning the job is only the beginning of phase two.

The pattern can be depressingly predictable.

1. YOU COMPLAIN ABOUT THE WORK

The timelines have been overrun.

The workmanship is defective.

Rooms are unfinished.

There are safety or compliance concerns.

You raise reasonable complaints.

You put them in writing.

You provide the evidence.

2. SUDDENLY, YOU’RE THE PROBLEM

Instead of answering what you’ve raised, the narrative changes.

Suddenly: “You owe us money.”

So you ask the obvious question:

Where’s the evidence?

And no evidence materialises.

3. YOU ASK THEM TO STAND BEHIND THEIR OWN WORK

Come back and inspect it.

Explain what was done.

Explain what wasn’t done.

Account for the money.

Address the defects.

Produce the paperwork.

And sometimes, the confidence disappears remarkably quickly when someone is asked to substantiate their position.

4. CHALLENGE THE ALLEGED DEBT

This is where things can escalate.

Instead of resolving the underlying dispute, you receive formal legal correspondence.

A demand for payment. A statutory demand. A letter before action.

And sometimes there’s another tactic:

MAKE THE CUSTOMER SHUT UP.

Your review.

Your social media post.

Your complaint to a regulator or other relevant body.

Your account of what happened.

Suddenly, it’s all described as “defamatory.”

Take it down.

Stop posting.

Stop complaining.

Stop talking.

Threats of injunctions and/or damages follow.

For someone unfamiliar with the process, this can be terrifying.

It can feel like receiving a solicitor’s letter means you must have done something wrong.

It doesn’t.

A solicitor’s letter is not a court judgment.

An invoice is not automatically proof that a debt exists.

A cease and desist letter is not, by itself, an injunction.

And a threat of legal proceedings is not the same thing as a court deciding the case.

Headed paper does not turn allegations into facts.

That doesn’t mean formal correspondence should be ignored.

Quite the opposite.

It means you should stop reacting emotionally and start looking at the evidence.

Because when someone is demanding money - or asking you to stop speaking about your experience - the important question isn’t how intimidating the letter looks.

It’s:

WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE?

⸻

WHY THIS MATTERS

A disputed building job can turn into something much bigger when allegations about defective work are met with unexplained demands for payment, refusal to properly substantiate those demands, and escalating legal threats when the customer challenges them.

That sequence can be a serious warning sign.

And the answer isn’t to shout louder.

It’s to become more organised.

Build the paper trail.

Stick to the facts.

Preserve everything.

And if there are genuine regulatory or safety concerns, consider reporting them to the appropriate authority, such as Trading Standards, Building Control or the HSE, depending on the issue.

⸻

MOST IMPORTANTLY: DON’T PANIC.

A threatening letter may look frightening.

It may contain legal terminology you’ve never seen before.

It may demand action within days.

It may threaten court proceedings.

But none of that answers the fundamental question:

Can the allegations actually be proved?

Because intimidation works best when people mistake confidence for evidence.

Don’t.

There is a huge difference between:

“We’re going to take you to court.”

and:

“A court has decided you are wrong.”

One is a threat.

The other is a judgment.

Know the difference.

The work may have stopped.

The alleged invoices may have started.

The threats may have arrived.

But that doesn’t mean you have to roll over.

Because when the work can’t be defended on its merits, some people may try to win the argument through pressure and intimidation instead.

And that’s exactly when you should become more organised, not more frightened.

THE LOUDER THE THREAT, THE MORE IMPORTANT THE PAPER TRAIL.

03/09/2026

£440,000. 30+ victims. FIFTEEN YEARS of warnings ignored. And the system did nothing.

Steven Gent has been accused of conning more than 30 people out of £440,000+ through botched and abandoned building work dating back to 2009.

Nine dissolved companies. Five aliases. The same alleged playbook: charm the customer, take the deposit, string them along for more money, then disappear - leaving people with unfinished, sometimes wrecked homes.

Victims reported him. Repeatedly.

To the Police.
To Trading Standards.
To the Council.

For FIFTEEN YEARS.

And what did they get?

“Sorry, it’s a civil matter.”

“Try Citizens Advice.”

Silence.

Let’s be crystal clear about what that means: if reports, evidence and an apparent pattern were repeatedly brought to the attention of authorities, why was nothing effective done to stop the alleged behaviour from continuing?

Every new alias.
Every new company.
Every new alleged victim.

How many could have been prevented?

This isn’t just about one alleged rogue trader. It exposes a much bigger problem with consumer protection in the building industry.

There is still no comprehensive compulsory licensing system for builders in England. There is still no simple mechanism preventing someone from repeatedly closing down one company and starting another under a different name. And there appears to be no effective system for connecting years of complaints about the same individual across different businesses and identities.

So victims are left doing the work themselves - gathering evidence, tracking companies, identifying aliases, finding other victims and trying to make authorities listen.

That is not how consumer protection should work.

How much more money has to disappear?

How many more homes have to be left unfinished or unsafe?

How many more people have to hear “it’s a civil matter” before someone finally asks whether the system itself has failed?

Because this is the same pattern we keep seeing, case after case.

Enough excuses.

If authorities have been put on notice repeatedly for years, they should be held accountable for what happens next.

It is time for proper regulation, meaningful enforcement and a system that protects consumers before they become victims - not one that tells them what to do (or doesn’t even help at all) after the damage is already done.

And to everyone who has been through something like this:

You are not alone. And it was never your fault.

Wendy Craig is among a group of 30 to have accused South Devon builder Steven Grant.

03/09/2026

If you’ve had issues with Essex and London Construction / Marc Porter / Tara Taylor then please contact Graham Nash:

https://www.facebook.com/share/19YmLcfd4p/?mibextid=wwXIfr

+44 7931 267191

03/09/2026

Sharing this because enforcement is the missing piece.

Having rights on paper means little if there’s no consistent mechanism to check they’re actually being delivered.

If you’ve been a victim of crime and feel your rights under the Code haven’t been met, you can complain - details in the link.

But we shouldn’t have to fight this hard just to get what we’re already entitled to.

03/09/2026

A “builder” took £6,000 from a pre-school to install a climbing frame. He cleared a patch of ground, and then vanished. The climbing frame never arrived.

His excuse for the unfinished work? He claimed he had cancer.

Then, while facing an earlier fraud trial, he tried to delay it with fake hospital appointments. Checks found no record of him as a patient anywhere.

He’s been jailed for 22 months after admitting 7 counts of fraud, plus misleading the court.

DC Benjamin Deegan said:

“Our investigation uncovered a trail of unhappy people who had put their trust in Rylands and ended up out of pocket.”

“He seemed to show little remorse for his actions, and thought that claiming he had cancer would provide him with a get-out-of-jail-free card.”

“He had a flagrant disregard for people and property and I am pleased we were able to bring him to court to face justice.”

A trail of unfinished jobs, unpaid bills and a pre-school waiting on a climbing frame. Justice caught up with him in the end.

'He seemed to show little remorse for his actions, and thought that claiming he had cancer would provide him with a get-out-of-jail-free card.'

02/09/2026

🚨 Can we talk about the word “cowboy”?

Andy Burnham has launched a crackdown on “cowboy builders”, announcing new payment protections after Citizens Advice revealed that more than 1 in 4 Britons have experienced problems with a home renovation.

We’re glad this is finally getting political attention.

But we think we need to challenge the language too.

Because “cowboy” makes serious criminal behaviour sound almost harmless.

It conjures up someone who’s a bit reckless, a bit rough around the edges, cuts a few corners and maybe disappears when things go wrong.

A rogue. A rascal.

That is NOT what some families are dealing with.

We’re talking about people who:

🔴 Take tens of thousands of pounds knowing they may never complete the work.

🔴 Demolish, dig up and strip properties with little or no regard for safety.

🔴 Leave the homes they work on in a worse state than they started in

🔴 Target elderly, disabled and vulnerable homeowners.

🔴 Disappear, rebrand and start again under another company name.

🔴 Leave families in debt, living in unsafe homes and fighting for years to recover.

That isn’t simply “cowboy” behaviour.

Where there is deliberate deception and financial gain, it can be fraud. Where there is repeated offending, the language should reflect the seriousness of that behaviour.

Words matter.

They influence how the public understands the problem - and potentially how seriously it is treated by regulators, Trading Standards, police and policymakers.

So what should we call them?

👉 Conmen builders
👉 Crooked builders
👉 Rogue traders - already recognised in consumer protection and Trading Standards
👉 Building fraudsters

Or do we need a better term altogether?

We’d argue that “cowboy” has become too soft a label for the worst cases.

Families left with dangerous, unfinished homes and life-changing financial losses deserve language that reflects the reality of what happened to them.

If the behaviour is deliberate, deceptive and criminal, why are we still describing it as “cowboy” behaviour?

What do you think - does the label need to change? And if so, what should we call them? 👇

02/09/2026

Why our experiences show the system is broken - and why cowboy builders need licensing and real enforcement

Our experience has exposed a gap that the current system simply doesn’t have a good answer for.

Look at the qualifications a director of the company we appointed holds:

- an MSc in Construction Commercial Management
- NEBOSH Construction Design Management
- Memberships of relevant industry bodies
- senior building safety and compliance roles for major councils
- Principal Designer work for national institutions and household-name organisations

On paper, that is exactly the kind of profile that should inspire confidence when someone is entrusted with your home.

And that’s precisely the point.

Our experience - which we have documented and are continuing to gather evidence to support - has shown us that qualifications, professional memberships and an impressive CV do not, by themselves, provide consumer protection.

There is currently no comprehensive licensing system for construction companies and directors that ensures a track record follows the people and businesses responsible.

And when something goes seriously wrong, homeowners can find themselves navigating a fragmented system involving HSE, Trading Standards, building control, the Police, The Insolvency Service and civil proceedings - with different bodies responsible for different pieces of the puzzle.

Too often, the homeowner is left to join those pieces together.

We believe our case demonstrates why this needs to change. We think the following is required:

🔨 Licensing for construction companies and directors - so competence, conduct and track record matter, not just qualifications.

⚖️ Meaningful enforcement - including quick and effective criminal enforcement where appropriate, rather than leaving homeowners dependent on costly and often inaccessible civil action.

🔁 Action on phoenixing - so companies cannot simply fold and allow the same individuals to reappear elsewhere without meaningful scrutiny of their previous track record.

🏛️ A single, accountable regulatory route for homeowners - somewhere people can turn when serious construction problems arise, rather than being passed between disconnected systems.

Impressive credentials are not consumer protection.

A qualification tells you what someone has studied. A professional title tells you what memberships they hold. Neither necessarily tells a homeowner what happens when things go wrong.

Homeowners deserve a system that helps prevent serious problems before they happen - and provides a clear, properly resourced route to accountability when they do.

That is why we will keep sharing our experience and the evidence behind it.

If this resonates with you, or you have experienced something similar, we’d like to hear from you. Please DM us.

02/09/2026

⚠️ BUILDING COSTS ARE UP 50%+

AND THAT’S EXACTLY WHY COWBOY BUILDERS ARE THRIVING

A new article on LBC lays out something homeowners are already experiencing firsthand: building work has become dramatically more expensive.

The reasons? A chronic shortage of skilled tradespeople, an ageing construction workforce, years of inadequate training, and materials that remain far more expensive than they were a decade ago.

An extension that might have cost around £80,000 ten years ago could now be £120,000–£130,000+.

But here’s the part that should worry every homeowner:

This is exactly the environment cowboy builders thrive in.

When genuine skilled labour is scarce and expensive, a quote that is £30k, £40k or £50k below everyone else isn’t necessarily a bargain.

It can be bait.

Because if the real cost of doing the job properly is high, how does someone consistently undercut every reputable contractor?

Unqualified labour.

Corner-cutting.

Cheap materials.

Unpaid subcontractors.

Work being left unfinished.

Or, in the worst cases, taking a large deposit and disappearing altogether.

And the skills shortage makes the problem even worse. The bigger the gap becomes between what quality building work actually costs and what a rogue trader promises, the more attractive the cheap quote becomes to a homeowner desperate to make their budget work.

There’s another problem we’ve been highlighting:

In England, you don’t need a builder’s licence or a mandatory trade qualification to call yourself a builder.

There is no comprehensive mandatory register of builders that homeowners can check before handing over tens of thousands of pounds.

And when rogue operators are caught, there can be far too little to stop them simply moving on, changing the company name and starting again.

Meanwhile, homeowners are often left being told:

“It’s a civil matter. Take them to court.”

Try telling that to a family who has just lost their life savings.

The construction industry’s skills crisis is not a reason to lower standards.

It’s a reason to raise them.

🔨 Mandatory licensing for anyone taking substantial deposits for building work.

🔨 A proper public register so homeowners can see who they’re dealing with.

🔨 Stronger criminal enforcement where there is deliberate fraud, deception or abandonment.

🔨 Real consequences for repeat offenders, rather than allowing them to simply reinvent themselves under another name.

Because a labour-starved, high-cost construction industry with an incredibly low barrier to entry is a gift to cowboy builders.

And ultimately, it’s the homeowner who pays the price.

Cheap building work isn’t cheap when you have to pay twice to put it right.

Government needs to act before another family loses its savings - not after.

Brexit and Covid drove out the Eastern European workforce, and prices went up - but that's only half the story, writes contractor Luke Burford

02/09/2026

It’s good to know that Trading Standards provide training to their officers on The Fraud Act.

Details are as follows:

Aimed at officers dealing with serious criminal offending which may exceed the threshold of regulatory legislation.

With emphasis on doorstep crime, organised crime groups and abuse of positions of trust, delegates will learn about the circumstances where fraud offences should be considered, and the strengths and weaknesses of the legislation. Case studies and practical sessions reinforce the delivery.

What you will learn:

- High Impact Criminality in the Consumer Landscape,
- Application of the Fraud Act to Trading Standards investigations,
- Key Fraud Act offences relating to Trading Standards,
- Investigations, key offences under the Theft Act,
- Mens Rea, dishonesty and deception,
-Similarities and differences between the Fraud Act and regulatory offences, fraudulent Trading, - Abuse of positions of Trust.

🔍 Could the Fraud Act strengthen your investigations?

Join our online training session,"The Fraud Act: Why, When and How?", and gain practical insight into using fraud legislation to tackle serious criminal offending in a Trading Standards context.

Through real-world examples, case studies and interactive exercises, you'll explore the key offences, evidential requirements and investigative considerations that can make fraud legislation a powerful enforcement tool.

📅 5 October 2026
💻 Online via MS Teams
🎓 3 hours CPPD

Book your place today: https://events.tradingstandards.uk/TheFraudActWhyWhenandHow #/

01/09/2026

Andy Burnham’s “crackdown” on cowboy builders? A voluntary code and an app.

Voluntary. Meaning the traders who are already scamming people can just… not sign up. The ones already doing right by their customers will be the ones filling in the forms.

Andrew Griffith, Then-Shadow Secretary of State for Business and Trade, had it right: “Those who break the rules will keep breaking them regardless of whether there is an app in the way.”

We’ve lived the reality this policy pretends to solve.

When a rogue trader causes real damage, families aren’t short of paperwork - they’re often short of anyone who’ll actually enforce the rules that already exist.

Trading Standards are under-resourced. Police treat too many cases as “civil”. Companies can be quietly dissolved and reopened under a new name the moment things get serious.

No consequences. No deterrent. No justice.

You don’t stop a con artist by asking them nicely to join a scheme.

You stop them with enforcement that bites and sentences that mean something.