David Isaac still being evasive

In all the years compiling and writing this column, since September 13, 1992, I have never dealt with anybody as evasive and non-communicative as David Isaac, or whatever his real name is. Sending him letters is pointless. Indeed he rejects letters I post to him and they come back to me unopened.

However, I made it clear to Mr Isaac that, the more evasive he is, the more determined I become. At this stage, if he retains his evasive, non-communicative stance, I have no other option but to continue communicating with him via this column.

In any case, with extreme perseverance, I managed to set up a meeting with Mr Isaac on March 13, and I gave him a copy of the letter I received from Antoinette Galea. I explained to him that I was going to feature it. However I also informed him that I was prepared to wait for his reply accordingly with a view to featuring his comments in the same column.

Here follows the letter I received from Mrs Galea:

I have followed with interest the correspondence in your column regarding David Isaac, as I too was one of his victims last summer.

In June, I commissioned Mr Isaac to carry out some work - gypsum ceiling boards, alterations to bathroom tiles, coving, etc. The work was supposed to be finished in two weeks at the cost of Lm800.

Prior to starting work, Mr Isaac demanded a deposit of Lm500 for materials, which I paid, but the materials were never delivered. From the first day Mr Isaac brought over a couple of workers and left them at my house without the necessary tools and without telling them what needed to be done. They spent the day staring at each other without doing anything. Unfortunately this was to be the beginning of an exasperating experience which was to last more than three months!

After a couple of weeks Mr Isaac demanded more money as he said he had no funds to start the work. I was so frustrated with the situation that I gave him what he asked for in order to have my work finished - but to no avail. The 'workers' Mr Isaac used to bring on the erratic occasion had no experience whatsoever. They definitely did not know how to do the job. They never brought any tools with them. You can just imagine the hassle I went through all summer until I finally got rid of them and got somebody else to finish the work.

I am sending this letter as I would not like others to fall into the David Isaac trap and believe his advertising of having the work finished on time. Mr Isaac is not to be believed.

Thank you for your attention.

On March 28 Mr Isaac deposited the following letter addressed to me at the Sunday Times reception desk and I collected it on the same day:

You asked me to write to you, but I have nothing to write to you about. I can tell you that the three persons who are writing to you are not telling the truth. They all owe me money and you always write whatever you like. You are also going round the people trying to turn them against me. You should be neutral.

About the letter to Antoinette, you know I have arranged (sic) with her. She phoned you and she told you that she had settled everything with me. She also told you to stop the letter but you still seem to want to blow up the problem. If you want you can phone her up yourself and she will tell you that every thing is settled between us and that she is owed nothing.

First of all, I never received a phone call from Mrs Galea allegedly telling me she had settled everything with Mr Isaac. Moreover I am most definitely not "going round the people trying to turn them against" David Isaac. On the contrary, ever since I got involved in this case I have been more than fair in my dealings with Mr Isaac, or whatever his real name is.

In any case I referred Mr Isaac's letter to Mrs Galea, to Joseph B. Urry and to Edmund Barbara, and asked them for their comments.

Mrs Galea wrote:

With reference to Mr Isaac's letter of March 28 I want to make it clear that contrary to what he wrote, namely that he had "arranged with me", there was no reconciliation whatsoever between us.

Mr Isaac wrote that I owe him money. On the contrary, the truth is that he still owes me Lm100. Moreover I must stress that I never asked you not to feature my letter. In fact if that were the case I would never have sent you the letter in the first place because the reason I sent you the letter is to warn other consumers about Mr Isaac.

Mr Urry wrote:

On February 22, 2006, David Isaac continued work covering only two metres. On March 1 he phoned and told me that he was coming the next day. On March 2 he phoned at 11 a.m saying that he will be coming later on in the day, but as usual he did not turn up. On March 13 he wanted more money to finish the work. I told him payment for extra material will be made on completion of work. On March 28 he contacted me to inform me that he did not finish the work because he thought I was not going to pay him.

Mr Barbara wrote:

This letter by David Isaac does not surprise me because I know what type of a liar he is. I am still awaiting the decision of the Consumer Claims Tribunal and if it is in my favour it will obviously confirm that Mr Isaac owes me money.

Regarding your articles in The Sunday Times, I suggest that in the heading 'David Isaac' you also show his proper name 'Issa Isslam Tawfik Issa', because that is his actual name and he surely does not want to show his actual name in the papers because he is under a suspended court sentence whereby any criminal offence may activate the sentence. (His action in these cases does not constitute any criminal activity, because according to the police he has always started the work and therefore cannot be proved as fraud).

David Isaac is a fictitious name and now that this name is shown as unreliable, he might as well not use it any more and use another name to cover himself for his future cheating of people.

If the office of the Consumer Claims Tribunal in Valletta can help, in the same period, that is September 2005, when I submitted my request to the tribunal, there were two other claims by different consumers whose files were kept pending because Mr Isaac never accepted to receive the notice of the sitting, and obviously the files were later put aside by the office because they could not proceed. The file relating to my claim too was put aside for the same reason, but I have asked the Consumer Claims Tribunal office to reactivate the claim recently when you featured David Isaac in The Sunday Times. This office can help by giving us the name of the two consumers who were bitten by Mr Isaac and I am ready to approach them and invite them to join us in this dispute with him.

I shall inform you when the decision by the tribunal will be received.

As can be seen, in the same way Mr Isaac rejected my letters, regarding his dealings with Mr Barbara, he also rejected the notice of the sitting, etc.

Moreover, it is also interesting to note that when Mr Barbara submitted his request for the tribunal, there were two other claims by different consumers whose files were kept pending because Mr Isaac rejected the notice of the sitting. Subsequently the files were later put aside by the office because they could not proceed. I appeal to the persons concerned to write to me with a view to establishing what is going on.