Derrick Anthony Thomas, a local businessman, who started a geothermal air-conditioning company, Geocomfort, in 2008, not only did not have the skills to manage the business, he didn’t have the skills to install the AC units. In fact he was trained as a chef after leaving ICCI with a diploma in restaurant management.

Thomas also found out that local sub-contractors were also untrained in the specialist geothermal equipment.

A geothermal heat pump or ground source heat pump (GSHP) is a central heating and/or cooling system that pumps heat to or from the ground. It uses the earth as a heat sink. This design takes advantage of the moderate temperatures in the ground to boost efficiency and reduce the operational costs of heating and cooling systems.

By doing this, less power is required to cool a building. The customer  pays, up  front, for  the  geothermal  unit and  its installation. ln the  long  run, the  purchaser is supposed  to  benefit from cheaper power bills.

The Company did not manufacture the air conditioning units itself. The units were imported  from a manufacturer in the United States called  Enertech.

Thomas, however, conned at least four customers, between April 2009 and January 2010 out of $ 99,600 and wrote two bad cheques for almost $3,000 to the Cayman Free Press as payment for advertisements he had placed with them.

One of his customers, Expanded Polystyrene, when asked about the delay in the work he had paid a large deposit for, Thomas showed him a false wire transfer document to deceive.

John Furniss, Counsel for the Defendant said Thomas had pleaded guilty and had expressed deep remorse  for his actions.

He said Thomas was a man of very bright ideas, but “when it comes to the nuts and bolts of running a company he is absolutely appalling.”

Justice Quin said he was not convinced by the defendant’s alleged remorse and said the details of the crimes revealed that, despite being aware that he could not fulfill his business promises and obligations, he continued to take cash from more customers.

“What makes this case more serious,” he said, “is that the defendant cheated four separate customers and showed no regard for the loss of the significant sums of money they incurred. The court takes into account the fact that the jobs the defendant promised to do and was paid to do were never done. Therefore the customers not only lost the money they had handed to the defendant but they had to pay other companies to do the job that they hired and paid the defendant to do.”

He pointed out that the defendant was in no position to pay anyone back.

Justice Quin also raised concerns in Thomas’s social enquiry report. The defendant was hoping to dig himself out of his problems and finance his family through more entrepreneurial schemes rather than taking a job for which he was qualified and earning a wage.

Then the Judge pointed out Thomas’s his long history of offending, which included at least three separate dishonesty cases going back to 1998.

In Justice Quin’s sentencing ruling he said, “The defendant has shown a callous disregard for these unsuspecting victims. He made false representations, knowing that the jobs would never be completed. He is the consummate con man. There are few, if any, mitigating factors in this case and many aggravating features in the 4 Counts of theft and the one Count of obtaining services by deception.

“It is my view that, in  light of  these factors as  well as  the  defendant’s previous convictions for similar offences, the starting point should  be five years’ imprisonment. In light of the Defendant’s late guilty plea I will allow for a reduction of 20% and impose a sentence of imprisonment of 4 years for each of the counts of theft, to run concurrently.

“Count 1 [false cheque for advertising] is an entirely separate offence from Counts 3, 7, 11 and 14 and, accordingly, I impose a  sentence of 6  months for this offence, to  run consecutive to the four years for Counts 3, 7, 11 and 14. Time spent in custody is to be taken into consideration.”