Asbestos conman Lee Charles ordered to pay back over £80k for crimes in Ipswich, Cambridge and more

A conman has been ordered to pay back over £80k after claiming he was registered to remove asbestos and targeted 40 towns and cities including in Suffolk.

Lee Charles, of Grantham, deceived customers over the disposal of harmful asbestos and toured the country with his scam, with victims in Ipswich.

The 40-year-old was given a suspended prison sentence after previously pleading guilty in 2022 to lying to customers and giving false paperwork to hide his deception.

Charles carried out the acts all over the country including nearby affected areas such as Cambridge, Norwich, Kings Lynn, Great Yarmouth and Peterborough.

He appeared at Lincoln Crown Court on Monday, May 22 in a case brought by the Environment Agency under the Proceeds of Crime Act, following a financial investigation into the lawful costs he avoided from his crimes.

The UK banned the use of asbestos in 1999 as it is a hazardous substance when disturbed and carcinogenic.

Charles marketed himself as Lincs Demolition Ltd for two years, claiming he was registered to remove asbestos to gain lucrative jobs, but he had no legal permit to carry out the work.

After tricking customers, he stashed the waste asbestos in hired storage containers 200 metres from a school.

Charles told the owners of the storage space that he wanted to keep tools there and when he failed to pay the rent on the containers, the owners forced the locks and found the dangerous contents.

Once exposed, he abandoned the storage containers and moved his activities to an unpermitted waste site 16 miles away, where he continued to store asbestos unsafely.

Paul Salter, an Environmental Waste Crime Officer for the Environment Agency, said: "Lee Charles' crimes were not just illegal, but dangerous.

"He has been ordered to pay back, and this sends out a clear message to others who flout the law that waste crime does not pay."

“The Environment Agency supports legitimate businesses by disrupting and stopping the criminal element, backed up by the threat of tough enforcement as in this case.”