Fraud, by its nature, thrives in the shadows—exploiting trust, dodging scrutiny, and often leaving victims too ashamed or bewildered to fight back.
When it surfaces, the response of law enforcement can either shine a bright light on the crime or let it fester in the darkness: Two recent cases, each involving sums hovering around £80,000, lay bare a striking divide in how UK police forces tackle such economic wrongdoing.
West Yorkshire Police, in one corner, chased down a serial fraudster with dogged determination, piling years onto his prison term as new victims emerged. In the other, Lancashire Constabulary’s handling of a company collapse festooned with red flags has been, at best, a study in silence—at worst, a shrug of indifference.
The contrast is as telling as it is troubling, and it begs a closer look at what drives such disparities in a system meant to protect the public.
The West Yorkshire Pursuit: A Fraudster Cornered
Peter Gray, a 35-year-old from Mirfield, West Yorkshire, didn’t just commit fraud—he turned it into a twisted art form. Between 2020 and 2022, he preyed on four women, weaving a web of deceit that saw him secure loan applications in their names, pocketing roughly £80,000. The courts caught up with him in 2023, and Leeds Crown Court handed down a 56-month sentence—a hefty punishment for a man who’d left lives in tatters.
But Gray’s story didn’t end there. Even from behind bars, his past kept unravelling, thanks to WYP’s refusal to let the case rest.
Investigators dug deeper, and what they found was chilling. Gray had struck again, this time targeting a woman he’d met on the dating website, Tinder. Posing as a devoted partner, he spun a tale of romance convincing enough to part her from £50,000—money she’d never see again.
Another victim, a male friend from his golf club, emerged too, stung by a betrayal dressed up as camaraderie. These weren’t isolated acts but part of a pattern, one that only came to light because the police kept pushing.
When the BBC broke the story in early 2025, it noted how these additional victims stepped forward after learning of Gray’s prior convictions—a ripple effect of publicity and proactive policing.
At Leeds Crown Court in February 2025, Gray faced the the full force of the law again, with an extra 28 months added to his original jail sentence. Five years in total, all told, for a spree that showed fraud isn’t just about money—it’s about the wreckage left behind.
The force’s role here wasn’t flashy, but it was relentless. They didn’t stop at the first conviction; they followed the threads, tracked the victims, and built a case that stuck. It’s the kind of effort that makes a dent—not just in Gray’s freedom, but in the broader fight against economic crime.
The Lancashire Lapse: A Fraud Left Hanging
Across the Pennines, a different tale unfolds—one that’s less about pursuit and more about pause: Danoli Solutions Ltd., a long-standing fixture in the small and medium business scene in Ormskirk, hit the skids in July 2023, folding with £87,000 unaccounted for in its Director’s Loan Account.
The man at the helm of the IT and computer repair business, Paul Ponting, another notorious ‘Walter Mitty’ character and womaniser, had presided over a company that, on paper, was a complete financial mess. His wife, Anna Ponting, as co-Director and Company Secretary, a willing and artful co-conspirator. Indeed, as Secretary, she holds substantial culpability under the Companies Act and, according to a well-placed insider, she was very much at the forefront of the alleged malpractice.
The liquidator’s report, a dry but damning document, pointed to unexplained withdrawals, missing records, and a financial black hole that screamed suspicion. This wasn’t petty cash gone astray—it was a sum that could ruin livelihoods, and it warranted a hard look. Not least as the £103,651 owed to creditors comprised a substantial amount of public funds. Unpaid taxes, being one prime example
Enter Lancashire Constabulary—or rather, they don’t even get through the door. In early December, 2024, the case was reported in person to Inspector Iain Carr, who was handed a copy of the Danoli liquidator’s report as a roadmap to what looked like textbook fraud.
Preston’s top neighbourhood cop was also pointed to extensive investigations carried out by Neil Wilby Media, over the preceding 18 months, that not only predicted the Danoli demise, it chronicled it in forensic detail, thereafter, in a series of articles almost entirely upon what could be gleaned from trusted open source, such as Companies House.
The response from Lancs? Silence, eerily creepy nothingness from an officer who knows Ponting well. Not least, as it has recently been revealed that Inspector Carr was based at Ormskirk Police Station as neighbourhood sergeant earlier in his career. A fact he appears to be strangely shy about revealing.
Very few people who have lived, or worked, in the West Lancashire commuter town will not have heard of ‘The Ormskirk Vigilante‘, as Paul Ponting is widely termed.
A follow-up email for a status report on the fraud investigation, in February, 2025, hit the same wall of silence, and when pressed, the force has declined to comment. Leaving the question hanging: Was this even recorded as a crime by Lancs as required by Home Office guidance for front-line officers?
The previous Neil Wilby Media piece on this growing mystery, published on 11th March, 2025 read in full here), laid it all out in very plain terms—the company’s collapse stinks of wrongdoing, yet the police seem content to let it drift. No updates, no assurances, no sign of movement, no statements taken. Just a void where action might have been.
It’s not that Lancashire Constabulary lacks the means. They’ve got the same tools as their West Yorkshire counterparts—access to fraud squads, financial investigators, the full policing works. But tools are only as good as the will to use them, and here in the Red Rose county, that will appears distinctly absent.
The liquidator’s findings weren’t subtle; they were a flashing red neon sign pointing to potential criminality. Yet, nearly two years on from Danoli’s demise, the trail—if there ever was one—seems cold. For those watching, it’s hard not to wonder: if £87,000 vanishing doesn’t stir a response at Preston Police station, what does? Particularly, as one of the alleged perpetrators, Paul Ponting, like West Yorkshire’s Peter Gray, has a history of scamming, dodgy dealing and, moreover, a string of failed companies.
The Bigger Picture: Trust, Deterrence, and Drift
These two cases, separated by geography but linked by scale, throw a harsh light on the uneven terrain of UK policing. West Yorkshire’s approach isn’t perfect—no force is—but it’s a beacon of what’s possible when fraud is met head-on. Victims got justice, a predator was put away in prison, and the message went out: this won’t be tolerated.
Lancashire’s stillness, by contrast, sends no message at all. It’s not about malice or incompetence—those are too easy to pin. It’s about drift, the kind that seeps into systems when priorities blur or resources thin. A culture of self-serving, laziness and ineptitude about which Lancs has received media criticism previously.
The fallout is real: When police chase fraud with gusto, people notice. Victims feel emboldened to speak, communities trust the badge a little more, and would-be crooks think twice. Gray’s extra sentence didn’t just punish him—it warned others. But when a case like Danoli’s languishes, the opposite happens. Silence breeds doubt. Why report a fraud if it’s just going to gather dust? Why trust a force that won’t stir? And for those eyeing their next scam in Lancashire, and history shows that the Ponting’s are not slow to grasp such opportunities, a lack of police heat might just feel like an open door.
This isn’t just about two forces—it’s about a patchwork of responses across the country. Fraud is on a steep rise, fuelled by digital trickery and old-fashioned gall, yet policing it remains a lottery. Some forces, like West Yorkshire, lean in; others, like Lancashire, lean back. The difference isn’t always about money or manpower—though those play a part. It’s about culture, focus, and the grit to tackle crimes that don’t bleed but still wound.
Bridging the Gap: A Path Forward
So, where’s the fix? It’s not enough to shrug and say “that’s policing.”
Fraud’s too slippery, too corrosive, to leave to chance. One starting point is consistency—making sure every force treats these cases with the same baseline seriousness. A national framework for logging and tracking fraud reports could cut through the fog, ensuring no case vanishes into the ether. It’s not sexy, but it’s a start—giving officers a clear playbook and victims a fair shot.
Then, of course, there’s know-how. Fraud isn’t a brawl in the street; it’s a puzzle of numbers and lies. Forces need investigators who can read a balance sheet as well as a rap sheet—specialists trained to spot the dodgy withdrawal or the phantom loan. West Yorkshire’s success didn’t come from luck; it came from commitment and competence. Spreading that across the board takes investment, sure, but it’s cheaper than letting fraud fester.
And accountability matters. If forces knew their fraud stats were under scrutiny—say, through regular audits from those charged with political oversight in the Police and Crime Commissioner’s office—they might feel the heat to act. Not to name and shame, but to nudge the laggards like Inspector Carr into gear. Lancashire’s silence might not survive that kind of spotlight; nor should it.
The Bottom Line
Peter Gray is behind bars because West Yorkshire Police wouldn’t let go. Danoli Solutions’ missing £87,000 is still a mystery because Lancashire Constabulary hasn’t grabbed hold. Two cases, two very similar sums, two starkly different fates.
The lesson isn’t complicated: fraud doesn’t stop itself—police do. When they chase it, justice follows. When they don’t, questions linger—and so does the damage. For a crime that thrives on gaps, the real fix is closing them, force by force, case by case.
UPDATE: Since this article was published, an archive has been passed to Neil Wilby Media containing a substantial amount of historical information relating to the Pontings and their chequered business history. Once checked and triangulated, it will form the basis of a follow-up article.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Page last updated: Sunday 23rd March, 2025 at 16h40
Corrections: Please let me know if there is a mistake in this article. I will endeavour to correct it as soon as possible.
Right of reply: If you are mentioned in this article and disagree with it, please let me have your comments. Provided your response is not defamatory it will be added to the article.
Photo Credits: NWM
© Neil Wilby 2015-2025. Unauthorised use, or reproduction, of the material contained in this article, without permission from the author, is strictly prohibited. Extracts from, and links to, the article (or blog) may be used, provided that credit is given to Neil Wilby, with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
Neil Wilby Media 
Leave a comment