The daddy deceiver: How Angelica Harte tricked three fathers into having children they hadn't bargained for
MCP
As a 31-year-old woman, she might be expected to have developed a more
mature attitude to pregnancy and childbearing. The reality is anything but.
Because Angelica, who claims to be 'addicted to having babies', readily
admits to tricking three hapless men in succession into fathering half her
brood of illegitimate daughters.
A former model, she now lives in a luxurious house in Hertfordshire with her
lawyer partner. And so thrilled is she by her family so far that she is
planning to expand it even further, this time by IVF so that she can select
a male embryo.
For all those women out there who have struggled to conceive children,
Angelica's story makes for bitter reading. But Angelica is proud of her
achievements. She plans to tell her children the truth about their
conceptions, seemingly with little understanding of the effects such
knowledge could have on them.
Defiantly, she says: 'I'll tell them I wanted a baby, but that I didn't tell
their fathers I was trying to get pregnant. When they realise that I was
prepared to lie to conceive them, they'll know they were really wanted and
much-loved babies.'
It's a very odd version of what love and parenting is all about. And the
more Angelica talks, the clearer it becomes that she is creating baby after
baby to fulfil her own deep-seated and alarming need for love and attention.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, two of the three men duped into fatherhood ended
their relationships amid bitter recriminations.
The sorry story of how Angelica became mother to Amber, 13; Summer, seven;
Lola, three; Myla, nearly two; and six-month-old twins, Bonnie and Violet,
began with her own unhappy and dysfunctional childhood.
The middle child of three, her father, a writer, and mother split up before
her teens.
She says: 'I had an awful, loveless childhood. I used to sit alone with my
dollies as a little girl, playing mummies and babies. My mother left,
remarried and had another two daughters. I remained with my father, looking
after my older and younger brothers.
'When I was 16, I met a boy. He was two years older than me and I moved in
with him and his mother. Within a year, I became pregnant. I was taking the
Pill, but it failed. But I was thrilled to be pregnant.
'When I told him, he was horrified. His mother advised me to have an
abortion, because I was too young and there was no money. But I refused. He
asked me to choose between him and the baby, so I walked out. I was 12
weeks' pregnant, with nothing but clothes and a suitcase.'
One might assume that a pregnant and homeless 17-year-old would be fearful
about her future. But not Angelica. She says: 'I felt so excited. I thought:
"This is a challenge, but I'm worldly and smart."
'I knew I would be a good mother - far better than my own mother had ever
been to me. When I felt the baby's first kick, about 19 weeks into my
pregnancy, I felt the first real wave of love.'
Angelica set up home in Peterborough, where her mother Jacqui was now living
with a new partner and their own daughter. Her mother was present at the
birth of Amber in June 1995.
Angelica says: 'It was a terrible 18-hour labour, but the second I saw
Amber, I was overwhelmed by love. It was the first time in my whole life
that I had ever been truly happy. I was on such a high, and it lasted. Other
people might be exhausted or worn down by first-time motherhood, but I
thrived. I loved cradling Amber in my arms, feeding her as she gazed up at
me. I loved the responsibility of caring for her, changing her and knowing
that she loved me unconditionally back.
'When Amber grew old enough to see other children with their fathers, she
asked me "Do I have a daddy?" and it nearly broke my heart.
'I said: "Mummy had a boyfriend and we made a baby, but he decided he wanted
to stay living with his own mummy and I wanted to keep you."
'I did try to contact her dad after Amber was born, but he didn't want
anything to do with her. When I recently emailed him on Facebook, I told him
that she wanted to meet him. But he replied just once, saying he did not
want to know her.'
What a heartbreaking message for a girl on the cusp of adolescence to have
to come to terms with when her mother tells her, as she presumably will.
'I did feel guilty that, as a little girl, she had no father figure. Then,
when she was three years old, I moved to Northampton and met a man named
Barney, through mutual friends. We moved in together and, after two years, I
decided that I wanted a little brother or sister for Amber.'
While most couples talk about expanding their family, Angelica tricked her
partner by becoming pregnant by stealth - and then presented him with a fait
accompli.
She says: 'We had never discussed having a baby, and I wasn't too sure what
he would think about it, so I just stopped taking the Pill. After about
three months, I was pregnant.
'I was absolutely thrilled, and when I told him the news, Barney seemed to
be fine about it. But as my stomach grew bigger, he started to stay out more
and more with his friends. I was obsessed with tracking every stage of my
pregnancy, looking it up in books and saying "The baby is the size of a
grape now", but he wasn't interested.
'When I went into labour, he sat in the corner of the room reading the
newspaper and eating his sandwiches. I felt so let down. This was supposed
to be the most important day of our lives and he was just showing me how
little it really meant to him.' The fact he had no role in the decision to
start a family is seemingly lost on Angelica.
Her second daughter, Summer, was born in October 2001 - but her birth
sounded a death knell for the shaky relationship between her parents.
Angelica says: 'Perhaps Barney was angry and resentful because he thought
that I had tricked him. But I didn't care as I had another little baby in my
arms and I felt complete again. I was so happy - I could almost drink in her
beautiful baby smell.
'Barney and I rowed every night, and when Summer was six months old I left
him to move down to London for a fresh start with my daughters.'
Angelica took a job as a catalogue model and then decided to treat herself
by hiring a personal trainer. She says: 'I wanted to get my pre-baby weight
back, so I hired a personal trainer, even though it cost £50 an hour. The
trainer's name was Oliver, and although he was six years younger than me, he
was rather cute. Within a few months, we had become an item.'
Then, surprise, surprise, Angelica decided to use her partner as an
unwitting sperm donor. She says: 'I thought he was nice-looking and would
make a good dad, so I stopped taking the Pill. I just thought: "It's my body
and I want a baby, so I'll have one."
'I didn't feel bad. I knew if I asked him whether he wanted a baby, he'd
probably panic and say no, because he was too young. So I decided to go
ahead and make the decision myself.
thought Oliver would eventually be delighted he was going to be a father.
It took me a couple of months to conceive and I proudly presented him with
the positive pregnancy test.
'He looked stunned and said: "How did that happen?" I shrugged and said:
"The Pill can fail, you know." I didn't dare tell him I had deliberately
become pregnant.
'Then, after his initial shock, Oliver was pleased. For a while, I thought
we might settle down, get married and raise all my daughters together.'
Seven months into the pregnancy, Angelica had pre-eclampsia and had a fit in
hospital which started an early labour. Her daughter Lola was born two
months premature in August 2005, weighing 4lb 13oz.
The new baby had been home barely three months when her parents'
relationship ended. Angelica says breezily: 'Oliver started to really
irritate me. It had been so stressful seeing my baby in the special care
unit, and I had recurring dreams about the birth for months. Oliver just
didn't seem to understand.
'But I loved Lola and I thought, "Well, I've got my baby, so I don't need
you."
'One night, we had a terrible row and I told him that it was over - I could
never love him. He stormed out and went to live with his mother. I didn't
feel guilty, because our relationship had become so unhappy. But we did stay
in touch and he remained a devoted father to Lola, taking her at weekends.'
So once more Angelica was single. But the fact that she now had three
children by three partners did not deter her from snapping up another
suitor, even though it was just three months since she and Oliver had split.
She continues: 'I fell in love with a man called Gary straight away. I met
him at a nightclub in April 2006. He came over to talk to me, I thought he
was lovely, and we started seeing each other immediately.'
Gary, 30, was a lawyer - no doubt lending him excellent father potential in
Angelica's eyes. Within eight months, Angelica had engineered another
pregnancy. And again she didn't tell the father - or should that be sperm
donor? - who believed she was on the Pill.
She says: 'I didn't tell Gary that I had stopped taking the Pill. I fell
pregnant immediately. When I told him, he was really shocked and said: "My
mum's not going to like this."
'I knew she wouldn't be happy - I was someone with lots of children by
different men, who had known her son for a matter of weeks. But the whole
family welcomed me and the baby. Gary wasn't bitter or angry that I was
pregnant. He said he loved me and had always wanted to be a dad. This time,
I had a partner who treated me, and our unborn baby, properly.'
Angelica's fourth child, Myla, was born in September 2007, and Angelica
moved into Gary's four-bedroom semi-detached home in Hemel Hempstead. Within
a year, she was yearning to be pregnant again.
She says: 'It sounds awful, but I feel that I am addicted to having babies.
I love the early stages, when they are totally dependent on me. Once they
can hold their own bottles, I feel like I am needed less - and I get broody
once more.
'When I wanted a fifth baby, I did discuss it with Gary. It was the first
time in my life I had sat down with a partner and talked about having a
planned baby together.
'Gary agreed; he loved being a father and he wanted another child, so we
were delighted when I fell pregnant again quickly. Then, at the three-month
scan, I discovered I was expecting twins. I was shocked.'
Bonnie and Violet were born in September 2008 - two months prematurely. An
emergency Caesarean on top of old scar tissue left the skin on Angelica's
stomach dangerously thin - and at least one doctor warned against having any
more children.
But incredibly - even though Angelica claims she has found complete
happiness at last - she says she feels the need for at least one more baby.
'Gary is worried because of my health. I've suffered from pre-eclampsia and
have needed several blood transfusions after haemorrhaging during my past
few labours. But I'm desperate for a little boy. It will cost a lot of
money, but I want IVF treatment which will allow us to select the sex of the
baby.
'Gary says he loves me and will pay for the treatment, as long as it does
not endanger my health.'
But what of the children who have already been born of bitterness and lies?
Angelica insists that she will tell them all about the circumstances behind
their conceptions - including the fact that their biological fathers were
duped into paternity.
Despite her astonishing approach to conception, Angelica is a devoted mother
whose life revolves around her children. Starved of affection during her own
childhood, she is determined that her own daughters are shown love.
Two of the fathers - Summer's dad Barney and Lola's father Oliver - see
their daughters at weekends. Amber's father remains uninvolved in the
13-year-old's life. Angelica says: 'All the girls love Gary and they know I
adore them. They are happy and don't question the fact that they have
different fathers.'
Meanwhile, Gary - to whom she became engaged last April - supports the whole
family financially and, except for child support, Angelica receives no money
from the State.
So, does Angelica feel any shame or regret for her behaviour, which is at
best misguided and, at worst, irresponsible?
'I do feel really guilty that I didn't tell any of these men I was trying to
get pregnant, but they've got a responsibility as well. They should have
been wearing protection, to make sure that I was not going to conceive. So
they are partly to blame.
'When I look at all my beautiful daughters, I don't regret anything. I wish
they were all Gary's children, of course, but the past can't be helped.'
tyciol
This is a pretty scary story. They talk about her
like she's a doting mother, and it does seem like she is...
temporarily. As soon as they can hold a bottle she wants a new one?
It seems like she loses interest fast, and she puts aside the
wellbeing of her older children who continue to need attention in
favour of continuing to conceive.
Andrew Usher
wrote:
> This is a pretty scary story. They talk about her
> like she's a doting mother, and it does seem like she is...
> temporarily. As soon as they can hold a bottle she wants a new one?
> It seems like she loses interest fast, and she puts aside the
> wellbeing of her older children who continue to need attention in
> favour of continuing to conceive.
Perhaps the only solution to these lying bitches is to kill a few of
them. Lying about contraception is no joke.
Andrew Usher
Ted
A bit extreme, that.
A better solution would be to change the financial incentives for
single motherhood. The original article (which seems to have gone
from the Daily Mail site) ignored the question of how she and her
brood were financed, until the very end, when we read
"Meanwhile, Gary - to whom she became engaged last April - supports
the whole
family financially and, except for child support, Angelica receives no
money
from the State."
Note that it says that it's the State that supplies the child
support. Are the other fathers not on the hook?
A viable way for an unmarried mother to support herself has developed
in recent years: she has many children, each one with a different
father, and claims child support from each. Create a viable economic
niche, and someone will fill it.
> Lying about contraception is no joke.
No, it isn't.
>
> Andrew Usher
Andrew Usher
> > Perhaps the only solution to these lying bitches is to kill a few of
> > them.
>
> A bit extreme, that.
>
> A better solution would be to change the financial incentives for
> single motherhood. The original article (which seems to have gone
> from the Daily Mail site) ignored the question of how she and her
> brood were financed, until the very end, when we read
I've consistently supported this, too. Court-ordered child support
should be abolished. Government aid (unless we have a guaranteed
income - http://menswiki.wikidot.com/essay:basic-income) should be
paid only to those that really need it and the child benefit should
never exceed the minimum cost of raising a child.
> Note that it says that it's the State that supplies the child
> support. Are the other fathers not on the hook?
I assume they are, and the article was just sloppy.
> A viable way for an unmarried mother to support herself has developed
> in recent years: she has many children, each one with a different
> father, and claims child support from each. Create a viable economic
> niche, and someone will fill it.
Yes - but we can't do anything about it until we acknowledge that it
IS a problem, and that requires being honest about women, which is a
crime in our feminised age.
> > Lying about contraception is no joke.
>
> No, it isn't.
On the other hand, if she never said anything about birth control, the
man is equally responsible (assuming he actually ejaculated inside her
- obviously I'm not talking about the 'turkey baster' here).
Nonetheless, for obvious pragmatic reasons, child support should still
not be enforced.
Andrew Usher
Dustbin
I've been saying that for thirty years - largely
because no one will do anything to bring females
under effective control no matter how serious
their anti-social behaviour.
Unfortunately, to say that could be interpreted
as incitement and the cops would love to jump
all over us for that.
Have you noticed that barely 5 hours after this
was posted it has been removed from the Daily
Mail website?
D.
>
> Andrew Usher
--
=======================
Women have spent the last
30 years proving that men
have been right for the
last 30 centuries.
=======================
Dustbin
> On Aug 25, 3:26 pm, Andrew Usher <k_over_hb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 24, 7:29 pm, tyc...@hotmail-dot-com.no-spam.invalid (tyciol)
>> wrote:
>>
>>> This is a pretty scary story. They talk about her
>>> like she's a doting mother, and it does seem like she is...
>>> temporarily. As soon as they can hold a bottle she wants a new one?
>>> It seems like she loses interest fast, and she puts aside the
>>> wellbeing of her older children who continue to need attention in
>>> favour of continuing to conceive.
>> Perhaps the only solution to these lying bitches is to kill a few of
>> them.
>
> A bit extreme, that.
>
> A better solution would be to change the financial incentives for
> single motherhood. The original article (which seems to have gone
> from the Daily Mail site) ignored the question of how she and her
> brood were financed, until the very end, when we read
>
> "Meanwhile, Gary - to whom she became engaged last April - supports
> the whole
> family financially and, except for child support, Angelica receives no
> money
> from the State."
>
> Note that it says that it's the State that supplies the child
> support. Are the other fathers not on the hook?
Why should they be if they have been LIED to?
This crazed idea that the man is on the hook on
matter how the pregnancy occurs is absurd.
D.
>
> A viable way for an unmarried mother to support herself has developed
> in recent years: she has many children, each one with a different
> father, and claims child support from each. Create a viable economic
> niche, and someone will fill it.
>
>
>> Lying about contraception is no joke.
>
> No, it isn't.
>
>> Andrew Usher
>
Dustbin
> Ted wrote:
>
>>> Perhaps the only solution to these lying bitches is to kill a few of
>>> them.
>> A bit extreme, that.
>>
>> A better solution would be to change the financial incentives for
>> single motherhood. The original article (which seems to have gone
>> from the Daily Mail site) ignored the question of how she and her
>> brood were financed, until the very end, when we read
>
> I've consistently supported this, too. Court-ordered child support
> should be abolished. Government aid (unless we have a guaranteed
> income - http://menswiki.wikidot.com/essay:basic-income) should be
> paid only to those that really need it and the child benefit should
> never exceed the minimum cost of raising a child.
>
>> Note that it says that it's the State that supplies the child
>> support. Are the other fathers not on the hook?
>
> I assume they are, and the article was just sloppy.
>
>> A viable way for an unmarried mother to support herself has developed
>> in recent years: she has many children, each one with a different
>> father, and claims child support from each. Create a viable economic
>> niche, and someone will fill it.
>
> Yes - but we can't do anything about it until we acknowledge that it
> IS a problem, and that requires being honest about women, which is a
> crime in our feminised age.
hear hear!
D.
>
>>> Lying about contraception is no joke.
>> No, it isn't.
>
> On the other hand, if she never said anything about birth control, the
> man is equally responsible (assuming he actually ejaculated inside her
> - obviously I'm not talking about the 'turkey baster' here).
> Nonetheless, for obvious pragmatic reasons, child support should still
> not be enforced.
>
> Andrew Usher
Ted
> Ted wrote:
> > Note that it says that it's the State that supplies the child
> > support. Are the other fathers not on the hook?
>
> Why should they be if they have been LIED to?
That's the current system. Doesn't seem right, does it? But my comment
was more about the article itself. The other fathers, and any
contributions they might make, have been made invisible. Instead, the
State is portrayed as supporting the child. The article distorts the
reality. In my view, this comes from an unconscious bias against men
and in favor of women-and-children. The effects can be unexpected.
For example, the State and its hangers-on can exploit that bias for
their own ends.
>
> This crazed idea that the man is on the hook on
> matter how the pregnancy occurs is absurd.
>
The basic problem is that, in the natural course of events, a child
will result, and that child needs to be supported somehow. If the
father doesn't want the child, then the system we have now is not the
best in my opinion. Are there other possibilities? Some are:
- The father just walks away and the entire financial burden falls
onto the mother.
- The father assumes the entire financial burden.
- Some sort of joint responsibility.
- The State really supplies the support (ie the father is off the hook
and the support comes from general taxation).
Any other possibilities?
What would be the best system?
Ted
> Have you noticed that barely 5 hours after this
> was posted it has been removed from the Daily
> Mail website?
Viewed in Google Groups, the date on MCP's original post is March 7
(although it appeared today in soc.men). The Daily Mail article could
be months old.
Dustbin
THX.
D.
Dustbin
> On Aug 25, 6:49 pm, Dustbin <dustbin.addr...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>> Ted wrote:
>>> Note that it says that it's the State that supplies the child
>>> support. Are the other fathers not on the hook?
>> Why should they be if they have been LIED to?
>
> That's the current system. Doesn't seem right, does it? But my comment
> was more about the article itself. The other fathers, and any
> contributions they might make, have been made invisible. Instead, the
> State is portrayed as supporting the child. The article distorts the
> reality. In my view, this comes from an unconscious bias against men
media people are now blocking my emails because
I keep on about the double standards.
> and in favor of women-and-children. The effects can be unexpected.
> For example, the State and its hangers-on can exploit that bias for
> their own ends.
>
>> This crazed idea that the man is on the hook on
>> matter how the pregnancy occurs is absurd.
>>
>
> The basic problem is that, in the natural course of events, a child
> will result, and that child needs to be supported somehow. If the
> father doesn't want the child, then the system we have now is not the
> best in my opinion. Are there other possibilities? Some are:
>
> - The father just walks away and the entire financial burden falls
> onto the mother.
> - The father assumes the entire financial burden.
> - Some sort of joint responsibility.
> - The State really supplies the support (ie the father is off the hook
> and the support comes from general taxation).
For some twenty years I have advocated a system
whereby children are all supported via taxation
as a matter of norm. But - given your spelling -
I suspect you are american and will not agree
with yet more State participation.
>
> Any other possibilities?
> What would be the best system?
If child rearing were recognised openly as a
valid function mothers would be supported
through childrearing years by good benefits from
the State paid for through taxation.
The burden upon men would be reduced since all
workers (including female) would be contributing
to the raising of the next generation. And,
since all men would be paying through income
taxes they would be less able to avoid it as
they can now.
D.
Andrew Usher
> > - The father just walks away and the entire financial burden falls
> > onto the mother.
> > - The father assumes the entire financial burden.
> > - Some sort of joint responsibility.
> > - The State really supplies the support (ie the father is off the hook
> > and the support comes from general taxation).
>
> For some twenty years I have advocated a system
> whereby children are all supported via taxation
> as a matter of norm. But - given your spelling -
> I suspect you are american and will not agree
> with yet more State participation.
How do you imagine this working? I would not want a universal child
benefit, as it would create an economic incentive to have children,
which is a bad idea.
> The burden upon men would be reduced since all
> workers (including female) would be contributing
> to the raising of the next generation. And,
> since all men would be paying through income
> taxes they would be less able to avoid it as
> they can now.
Do you think it's a problem that men 'avoid it' ?
Andrew Usher
Andrew Usher
> - The father just walks away and the entire financial burden falls
> onto the mother.
> - The father assumes the entire financial burden.
> - Some sort of joint responsibility.
> - The State really supplies the support (ie the father is off the hook
> and the support comes from general taxation).
>
> Any other possibilities?
> What would be the best system?
Preferably, the mother should be responsible if she can be. That is
the only way to properly discourage this kind of thing.
Andrew Usher
Meldon
That makes too much sense!
MummyChunk
> > From DM
> >
> > More photos here
> >
http://www.jlaforums.com/album.php?search=harte&search_cond=Pic%20Description&sort_order=&start=0
> >
> > and here:
http://www.jlaforums.com/album.php?search=harte&search_cond=Pic%20Title&sort_order=&start=0
> >
> > Angel Harte
> > United Kingdom
> > Performer Profile
> >
> > Gender: Female
> > Height: 5 feet 4 in
> > Weight: 120 lbs
> > Age Range: 25 - 35
> > Physique: Average
> > Hair Color: Blond(e)
> > Hair Length: Long
> > Eyes: Green
> > Ethnicity: Caucasian
> > Voice Type: Alto, Soprano
> >
> > Film
> > Killer Bitch Model in Launderette Liam Galvin
> > Drink,Drugs and KFC Seductive Lady Aml Ameen
> > Modeling
> > Bizarre Magazine Cover model Bizarre
> > Performer Skills
> >
> > Performance Skills: Dancing, Voiceover, Host, Singing,
Improvisation
> > Athletic Skills: Aerobics, Cycling, Gymnastics,
Rollerblading
> > Accents: British, Irish, Scottish, Middle Eastern,
Australian
> > Musical Instruments: Guitar
> > Dance: Ballet, Modern, Tap, Club/Freestyle
> >
> > Employment Details
> >
> > Work History: Film, Music Video, Theater, Commercial,
Television
> > Job Categories: Acting
> > Are you willing to work unpaid?: No
> > Authorized to work in United States: Yes
> > Primary Citizenship: United Kingdom
> > Valid Passport: Yes
> >
> > 4f4]
Seems that aging ex Page 3 girl Angelica Harte in a
bid to stay relevant and is in the news again
From DM
****
A former Page 3 model was left horrified after a creepy Iceland
delivery driver texted her to ask her out after dropping off her
shopping.
Angelica Harte, 44, answered the door to her flat that she lives in
alone with her door in her pajamas to take in her £60 shop.
Two hours after the delivery, Angelica got a text from the driver who
asked her to meet him in the park the next day.
He added: 'I'm not working so anytime that suits you.'
The ex-model told the DS: 'I was in my pajamas with no make-up on, but
even like that I still got that type of attention from a man who was
prepared to lose his job over asking me out.
I was scared that not only did he have my phone number but he had my
address also and could appear at any time. I was really distraught
over it. I didn't see the funny side of it at all.'
She explained: 'He seemed like a normal middle-aged man.
'He was staring at me and seemed to want to engage in conversation
whereas I'm really shy and just wanted my groceries and to shut the
door.
'About two hours later I got the text. I was shocked and angry.
'Within a week I think I complained to Iceland.
'Now my friend takes me food shopping which isn't ideal as I'm in the
vulnerable group so I'd rather stay away from people to avoid catching
Covid.'
Angelica, from Tettenhall, Wolverhampton, added: 'I felt vulnerable
and I didn't expect that type of nonsense just getting my shopping
delivered.'
The text from the driver read: 'Hi this is the Iceland driver from
earlier didn't get chance to say what I wanted because your neighbour
came out, do you fancy a walk in the park tomorrow I'm not working so
anytime that suits you.'
An Iceland spokesman told the Star that the driver has been fired.
And another article
****
Ex-Page 3 model horrified and 'scared' by Iceland delivery driver s
creepy text
Former glamour model Angelica Harte said she received a creepy text
from an Iceland delivery driver. He asked her whether she'd like to
meet him in the park after he brought her groceries
A former Page 3 model has slammed a creepy Iceland delivery driver who
texted her to ask her out after dropping off her shopping.
Angelica Harte answered the door to her flat in her pyjamas and said
she barely even spoke to the worker when he brought her £60 shop.
But two hours later, he sent her a text asking whether she d like to
meet him in the park the next day, adding: I m not working so anytime
that suits you.
Horrified Angelica says women should be able to take deliveries
without the fear of being hit on by staff.
The 44-year-old said: I was in my pyjamas with no make-up on, but
even like that I still got that type of attention from a man who was
prepared to lose his job over asking me out.
I was scared that not only did he have my phone number but he had my
address also and could appear at any time. I was really distraught
over it. I didn t see the funny side of it at all.
Angelica lives alone with her puppy Hugo and had been getting Iceland
deliveries for around a year when the incident occurred.
The text from the driver read: Hi this is the Iceland driver from
earlier didn t get chance to say what I wanted because your neighbour
came out, do you fancy a walk in the park tomorrow I m not working so
anytime that suits you.
She explained: He seemed like a normal middle-aged man.
He was staring at me and seemed to want to engage in conversation
whereas I m really shy and just wanted my groceries and to shut the
door.
About two hours later I got the text. I was shocked and angry.
Within a week I think I complained to Iceland.
Now my friend takes me food shopping which isn t ideal as I m in the
vulnerable group so I d rather stay away from people to avoid catching
Covid.
Angelica, from Tettenhall, Wolverhampton, added: I felt vulnerable
and I didn t expect that type of nonsense just getting my shopping
delivered.
An Iceland spokesman said that the driver had been fired.
View the attachments for this post at:
http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=619692297#619692297
This is a response to the post seen at:
http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=19078816#19078816