Ex-customer breaks down over used clothing business 'manipulation'

Thursday 26 September 2019

A former customer of a businesswoman on trial for allegedly selling £200,000 of second-hand clothing which never turned up, broke down in tears as she gave evidence in the dock, recalling losing thousands, and feeling "manipulated."

Lincolnshire-born Michelle Yuksel is charged with nine counts of fraudulent activity, all of which she denies.

On the second day of her jury trial yesterday, the prosecution called two of her former customers to give evidence. 

One of them - a woman from Leeds, who was pregnant at the time - explained how her husband and her had contacted Parisma, Ms Yuksel’s business in 2011. She said they had just started their business and were looking for used clothes they could buy to export and sell in Cameroon.

The woman told the jury that her order was worth £36,500 - half of which she was required to pay upfront for the order to be started. The jury heard that the couple had taken up a loan and used part of their savings to make up the £18,000. 

Pictured: Crown Advocate Simon Thomas is leading the prosecution case.

On Tuesday, Crown Advocate Simon Thomas had told the jury that at the time the woman placed her order, the balance over Parisma’s business accounts was just £4,500 and that it would not have been possible to start fulfilling the order without the deposit paid by the couple.

However, Mr Thomas added that only £7,036 of the deposit was used to purchase stock. “Was this to satisfy [the client's] order?” he questioned, adding that, given how matters unfolded, it was clear it had not been used for that purpose.

As she had promised that the goods would be dispatched four weeks after she had paid the deposit, the woman tried to arrange a visit to inspect the goods. A first visit was booked for 5 April 2011 but it was cancelled just five days before due to a “slight delay".

Pictured: The couple had just started their business and were looking for used clothes they could buy to export and sale in Cameroon.

Three months after she had paid her deposit, the woman was still waiting for her goods and asked to cancel her order. Ms Yuksel refused, referring to Parisma’s terms and conditions. 

As a result of the continuing delays, the woman began legal action against Parisma through Leeds-based solicitors. In her response to the solicitor’s letter, Ms Yuksel blamed the woman for failing to come inspect the goods and then later for amending her order, even though no complaint had been made at the time. 

The proceedings in Leeds County Court were eventually dropped as it was a matter for Jersey Law and it was too expensive for the woman to pursue the matters in Jersey courts.

“Ultimately, no goods have ever been delivered nor refund given,” the Crown Advocate told the jury. “The prosecution says that the defendant was not in a position to do so because she had used the funds that were provided to her by way of deposit in March 2011 to meet her own personal and business liabilities.”

Pictured: Advocate Ian Jones is defending Ms Yuksel.

Whilst being questioned by the Crown Advocate about the events, the woman appeared very emotional and broke down in tears on several occasions. She explained that she was pregnant at the time the events unfolded and that there was “a lot happening at the time."

She said it felt like “my life, everything, had been stopped” and that she tried to get her money back to find a new provider.

“If I had my money with me, we would have been able to carry on with our business,” she said.

The woman described how the fact Ms Yuksel refused to give the money back felt like someone was “holding her back.”

“I felt I was dreaming, as if I was living in a different world,” she stated. “Everything that was said it never come true [sic]… We had made everything possible for it not to be delayed." 

Pictured: The trial is being heard in Royal Court.

The woman said Ms Yuksel and her employees kept on “making promises and giving excuses”, including reimbursing flights for one of the cancelled visits which they never followed through on. 

“They were like a team manipulating me,” she said. 

The trial is continuing today and is expected to last over two weeks.