A suspected fraudster, who siphoned hundreds of thousands of euro from her unsuspecting victims in a government housing scam, went under a false name and insisted upon cash payments, a court heard.

Details of the alleged housing racket involving some €290,000 and a set of victims which, according to the prosecution, “keeps growing thicker by the day,” emerged in court on Thursday when the compilation of evidence against Sarah Ann Gatt kicked off.

The 41-year old self-employed St Venera cleaner, was remanded in custody last week after pleading not guilty upon arraignment to fraud, misappropriation, falsification of documents and other fraud-related charges.

The first alleged victim to take the witness stand on Thursday was a woman who recalled how she and other relatives were enticed to invest in the government “one-time” housing offer by the accused who went by the name of ‘Sue Borg.’

'Contacts at the Housing Authority'

In November 2020 the woman, a friend of the witness’s daughter, told them that she had contacts at the Housing Authority who could help her obtain the properties which were to be released and sold by tender. 

She said that her nephew, Luca Scicluna, worked at the Authority and could help along the way. 

Lured by the offer, the witness took up the offer, handing over the first payment of €35,350 “to open the tender,” said the witness.

But that was just the start and additional amounts were requested for paperwork, ground rent and then an extra sum to acquire the airspace of the house with two interconnected garages at Zejtun.

All payments were made in cash, as requested by ‘Borg’, explained the witness, exhibiting a CD with screenshots of all the WhatsApp messages exchanged with the accused. 

The witness and her relatives insisted that they were only willing to invest in the scheme as long as everything was above board, “black on white” and according to law. 

No property 

Asked by presiding Magistrate Astrid May Grima whether she had inspected the promised property before parting with her money, the witness said that she had not.

She had gone to the Zejtun address but found no property that matched the description given by the accused who had shown them photos of the interior.

That, coupled with the fact that the final deed of transfer never materialized, in spite of the accused’s constant promises that “they were almost there,” set the alarm bells ringing. 

The witness recalled various visits to a St Venera shop on Psaila Street, selling branded clothing, allegedly run by ‘Borg’ to demand their money back.

The sum allegedly owed to the witness, her daughter and two others stood at around €73,000.

On one occasion, they had insisted that ‘Borg’ write a note, acknowledging that debt and to put her official signature.

True identity

Though hesitant, the woman finally drew out her ID card on the shop counter and that was when her creditors realized that her name was Sarah Ann Gatt. 

On another occasion, the witness tried calling the accused nephew but was answered by a female voice which she immediately recognized as Gatt’s.

She hung up and subsequently called Gatt’s number telling her that she had tried calling ‘Luca’ but dialed a wrong number.

The woman had also offered them other property in Fgura consisting of garages with overlying flats.

But the witness said that she did not have enough money to match that deal unless she sold her own home.

The accused offered to handle the sale to secure enough funds for the witness to reinvest in the Fgura property. 

All along, the accused’s attitude was reassuring, always having ready answers for all her victim’s queries, the witness said.

On one occasion the accused turned to the witness for help, telling her that she needed €3,500, that her situation was desperate and that she was contemplating suicide. 

The witness encouraged her to seek help, but handed over the requested sum, not wanting to turn her back upon Gatt’s desperate call for help.

As time went by and suspicion increased, the alleged victim called the Housing Authority citing the names of officials given to her by the woman as her contacts there.

But it turned out that none of those individuals worked there.

On May 10 the alleged victim and her relatives went to the Housing Authority to demand their money back and after a while got a call from Inspector Shaun Friggieri summoning them to discuss the suspected fraud. 

Evidence for trial

As the testimony came to an end, the court declared that there was enough prima facie evidence for the accused to stand trial on indictment. A request for bail was objected to by AG lawyer Andrea Zammit who argued that the accused had an unruly character and that the number of alleged victims was growing by the day. 

The risk of tampering was real, he said.

Defence lawyer Marion Camilleri rebutted that presumption of innocence prevailed and since a number of charges dated back quite some time, the fear of tampering was reduced.

“Now that investigations are said to continue, God forbid if the accused were to be denied bail until all those persons testified!” remarked the defence.

However, in view of the nature of the case and the accused’s character, the request for bail was rejected.

The case continues in July.

Inspectors Shaun Friggieri and Ritianne Gauci are prosecuting, assisted by AG lawyer Shaun Zammit.Lawyers Franco Debono and Marion Camilleri are defence counsel.Lawyer Jonathan Abela appeared parte civile on behalf of the witness and her relatives.Lawyer Charles Mercieca also appeared parte civile for one of the other victims.