Car salesman stole £30,000 from employer after family expanded with quadruplets

A used car dealership’s sales manager claimed he stole up to £30,000 from his employer to “make ends meet” after his family expanded with the arrival of quadruplets.

The Manchester Evening News reported that Matthew Davies (35), of Belvedere Drive, Bredbury, an employee of Dace Motor Group's Dace Specialist Cars business in Stockport, sold company stock privately and had kept customer deposits in a year of dishonesty between October 2018 and 2019.

Davies would add fake cars to Stockport-based Dace’s stock list to give the impression of balancing the books, prosecutor Alison Whalley told Minshill Crown Court this week.

But his thefts were discovered when the firm’s accountant spotted a £570 discrepancy in the business’ books.

Davies initially made excuses as to why the cash had not been deposited into the the company account, the MEN reported, but he later broke down and admitted his crimes after being challenged by the company’s accountant and general manager.

Police investigations subsequently found that Davies, who was decsrcibed in court as being of previous good character, had run-up significant debts.

Despite earning around £50,000-per-year, he had been served a county court judgement to repay one individual, defaulted on a hire purchase agreement, and had credit card bills worth £1,800, the court heard.

Ricky John Holland, mitigating, told judge Angela Nield that Davies had committed his crimes in a bid to “make ends meet” after his family grew with the arrival of quadruplets, adding: “He had not used that money for nice holidays abroad or a lavish lifestyle.”

Judge Nield handed Davies a 10-month prison sentence, suspended for 18 months, ordered him to complete 200 hours of unpaid work and issued a compensation order.

The court heard that Davies had already repaid a “significant amount” to his former employer.

She described Davies’ deception as “a breach of a significant measure of trust”, adding that it had involved “a degree of sophistication”.

But she added: “This is the first time you have been before the court. For that reason and your good character there’s every prospect of completing an order that does not require immediate custody.”