A team of rogue builders who targeted elderly and vulnerable householders conned their victims out of about £800,000, a court heard.

Ringleader was William Smith, 43, who pressured, intimidated and frightened his victims in his 'despicable quest to relieve vulnerable people of as much money as possible’ said Judge Michael O’Sullivan.

Smith showed no mercy to his victims and deserved more than the eight years four months passed on him at Canterbury Crown Court said the Judge.

Jailed for 36 months was Smith’s son Billy Nelson Smith, 21, who Smith was said to have criminalised.

Also jailed for four and a half years was Timothy Killick, 35, of Stagshaw Close, Maidstone, whose company Smith used to launder cheques and who wrote out invoices for the illiterate Smith.

Smith, of Carlton Avenue, Greenhithe, admitted conspiracy, his son, of Green Street Green Road, Dartford, admitted money laundering, attempted deception and fraud. Killick admitted money laundering, deception and fraud.

Dominic Connolly, prosecuting, said Smith operated from January 2003 to September 2007 cold calling people in Thanet, Dartford, Gravesend, Hartley, Chatham, Tunbridge Wells and London - in all 43 households fell victim to him.

An unqualified builder, Smith on one occasion produced a card to a retired surveyor in Broadstairs claiming his firm was a member of the Guild of Master Craftsmen.

But far from being a craftsman, Smith’s work was shoddy, substandard, often just cosmetic and unnecessary and sometimes not done at all. Often householders had to employ bona fide builders to rectify Smith’s work. His charges were extortionate - a 46-year-old Margate man with learning difficulties paying £75,000 and a vulnerable Dartford man losing £101,500 to Smith.

He used a cheque conned from that victim to buy a £24,000 Mitsubishi, purchased through Killick, which was parked outside his home when police arrested him. Killick also bought a plot of land for £90,000 in his name for Smith.

Smith’s method was tell the housholder their roof and chimneys were defective and needed immediate work, quoting a price which would then be inflated when Smith claimed his workmen had found other serious faults. Sometimes they would deliberately damage the roof or seal it unnecessarily causing future headaches for the customer. Sometimes Smith produced a rotten piece of wood and claimed it came from the property.

He twice conned people into parting with houses in lieu of heavy bills and later sold them at a vast profit.

He hounded one woman of 82 into parting with her retirement funds of over £14,000 while she was caring for her dying partner. Another elderly couple lost over £12,000, money needed to care for their adult sons who had learning difficulties and still lived at home.

Smith was arrested, interviewed and bailed in April 2006. Afterwards, he teamed up with Killick, passed cheques through Killick’s account and used invoices in the name of Killick’s company, Emplex Building Limited. Nearly £215,000 passed through Killick’s account.

He also paid £48,600 into his son’s accounts as well as his wife’s and large deposits totalling £1m in less than three years were made but the Crown were unable to say all were from Smith’s fraudulent activities.

Smith’s late father - also called William Smith - was also believed to be involved with some of the scams.

Police are still hunting another man, Mark Baker, 44, from Caterham who absconded during his trial at the same court earlier this year. Baker was convicted in his absence of obtaining £75,000 from the Margate victim.

Smith had convictions for dishonesty, robbery and violence and despite being convicted of similar matters to the current offences, was said by Judge O’Sullivan to have failed to learn from earlier punishments.

Killick had convictions for burglary, handling and theft and Billy Smith had a conviction for dangerous driving.

Andrew Lewis, for Smith, stressed witnesses had been spared the ordeal of giving evidence and said Smith was acutely conscious of the wickedness of his actions and how wrong he had been to involve his son. He was looking to mend his ways and trying to improve his literacy skills.

Roy Brown, for Billy Smith, said his bank accounts were opened when he was young and he wasn’t aware of what his father was using them for.

His father was a strong influence and he didn’t realise it involved the systematic targetting of elderly vulnerable people.

He was only present once when roofing work was going on and the fraud offence involved the inflated price for gardening work. He was deeply ashamed and hoped to rebuild his life away from negative influences.

Matthew Lawson, for Killick, said he retained no assets and his account was only used to forward money. He was asked to become involved to write invoices but figures were not always included.

He pulled out after collecting a £5,000 cheque from one pensioner, choosing to stop, which Mr Lawson submitted was evidence of Killick’s remorse.

Sentencing the three Judge O’Sullivan had harsh words for Smith. “You used various techniques in your despicable quest to relieve these vulnerable people of as much money as possible. It is difficult to comprehend how low you could have sunk and it is all to do with your greed and quest for money. On occasions you would intimidate, pressure and frighten the victims.

“Your actions William Smith showed no mercy in respect of your victims. You would try to extract from them every last available sum they had.

“You appeared to have little or no concern for the anguish, financial loss and loss of confidence that so many of these people have suffered in the twilight of their lives. You have been responsible for criminalising your son and were employing young people and would be leading them down the same path.

“You deserve more than the sentence I am about to pass on you but I am constrained by statute in respect of the maximum sentence which is 10 years and I must give you appropriate credit for your guilty plea.”

Addressing Killick, Judge O’Sullivan said he must have known exactly what Smith was doing and how he was defrauding the elderly and vulnerable.

He told Billy Smith he had no doubt his father had corrupted him and had it not been for his age and matters put before the court, the sentence would be longer. It was his first involvement with dishonesty and must be his last.